• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The first living thing could not have come into being by random chance, therefore, God Almighty created all things. Just 1 proof.

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Verbal games are used by those with a losing position.
What caused the Big Bang?
That was not a verbal game. As I said, you should just admit that you do not understand analogies. I have noticed this among quite a few creationists. They tend to be too literal so they cannot understand concepts that are explained that way. That also explains why they do not understand so much of the Bible.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I wanted proof they were ignoring me blatantly.
Yep, he does that. Two days ago I gave him an extended explanation of why we have one fewer pair of chromosomes than other great apes. There was not a peep in response. That is why I won't answer his questions until he apologizes and promises to change how he posts.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
That was not a verbal game. As I said, you should just admit that you do not understand analogies. I have noticed this among quite a few creationists. They tend to be too literal so they cannot understand concepts that are explained that way. That also explains why they do not understand so much of the Bible.
What do you think of the findings by Robert Gentry?
Do you agree with the censorship he endured?
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Yes it does. Perhaps the problem is that you didn't understand it.



I predict you will not explain it.


I was. And my features are noodly appendages.
What was the first living creature?

Where there any enzymes in it? Which ones? Certain required reactions need enzymes as catalysts. If not, the reaction may take a vast number of years. Surely the primitive thing could not last more than a minute much less than many years.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
What was the first living creature?

How many more times must I answer this?

It was me. Me. MEEEEEEEE

Where there any enzymes in it? Which ones? Certain required reactions need enzymes as catalysts.

I am way above such pityfull bio-chemistry.

If not, the reaction may take a vast number of years. Surely the primitive thing could not last more than a minute much less than many years.
I have lasted for billions of years. Or 5 seconds. It's all relative.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What was the first living creature?

Stanley.
Where there any enzymes in it?
Maybe.
Which ones?

Why does it matter?
Certain required reactions need enzymes as catalysts.

Do they?
If not, the reaction may take a vast number of years.
Really? Are you sure that enzymes are the only answer?
Surely the primitive thing could not last more than a minute much less than many years.
Why not? Primitive things do not "burn energy" the way that modern life does. Of course you are trying to refute life without even properly defining it first.
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Stanley.

Maybe.


Why does it matter?


Do they?

Really? Are you sure that enzymes are the only answer?

Why not? Primitive things do not "burn energy" the way that modern life does. Of course you are trying to refute life without even properly defining it first.
So no answer.
Where did the eye come from?
 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
No, you just did not like the answers. If you can get serious then so can I.

Eye evolution has been explained to you several times.
And that was just a fable from the circular reasoning delusion.

Here is a link which shows that many dinosaurs tissue are not C-14 dead and therefor are not about 100 million years old,
So evolution, billions of year, and the rock layer age assumpotions are all false,

 

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Oh my! Three times you used the same lying source.

You keep refuting yourself.
Time to take your medicine ano admit the truth.

the Big Bang is dead.
The red shift theory is dead.
Evolution and billions have year is dead.
Abiogenesis is dead.
Atheism is dead.
The dating of fossils and rock layers is false.
Uniformatraianism is dead.
Christ has no rivals, being God Almighty.

The redshift theory has been disproved, even your guys know it,
So there is no expansion of the universe.
So no Big Bang,
But then there should just be ghostly neutrinos and nothing else.

 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Time to take your medicine ano admit the truth.

the Big Bang is dead.
The red shift theory is dead.
Evolution and billions have year is dead.
Abiogenesis is dead.
Atheism is dead.
The dating of fossils and rock layers is false.
Uniformatraianism is dead.
Christ has no rivals, being God Almighty.

The redshift theory has been disproved, even your guys know it,
So there is no expansion of the universe.
So no Big Bang,
But then there should just be ghostly neutrinos and nothing else.

No. Your inability to understand basic science does not make those dead. Your fear of learning even the bare bone basics tells everyone that even you do not believe the nonsense that you post.

And as a result, even if the myths of Genesis are true, you are calling God a liar. How do you justify doing that. You never answer that very serious question. You have to go to lying source after lying source, but none of them can change the fact that all of the scientific evidence supports the theory of evolution. That is why you have to keep yourself willfully ignorant. You might learn too muc.

Do you really want to convince others? Then put your money where your mouth is and learn what is and what is not evidence and why And learn the scientific method.

But I predict that your fear and weak faith will win out. The strong in faith are not afraid to learn.
 
Top