What if it was created by God to evolve?

[Subduction Zone]

Running where? What inappropriate questions?

I am standing here waiting for your evidence that you said you would deliver. Are you going to be.a person who keeps their word or not. Put forward at least a crumb.

As long as you refuse to learn the basics of science you are running away. You do not know enough to ask proper questions yet.

 

[dwb001]

As long as you refuse to learn the basics of science you are running away. You do not know enough to ask proper questions yet.

And you are not keeping your word to present evidence that you said you would.

Instead of belittling my ability maybe just present the evidence you said you would

 

[Subduction Zone]

And you are not keeping your word to present evidence that you said you would.

Instead of belittling my ability maybe just present the evidence you said you would

I am keeping my word. I said that once you learned what is and what is not evidence that I would give you all of the evidence that you wanted. You still do not understand the concept because you keep running away.


What is rather ironic is that if you did not insist on running away you would understand the concept by now and would be getting all of the evidence that you wanted.

And as I explained to you, nor is it belittling when I point out that you do not understand the concept of evidence, If I give you more evidence now you will just fail as you did with the case of Lucy again.

 

[metis]

So evolution by definition is not compatible with Christianity.

Most Christian theologians say that's not true-- about 70% according to the last survey I saw.

 

[Audie]

I am keeping my word. I said that once you learned what is and what is not evidence that I would give you all of the evidence that you wanted. You still do not understand the concept because you keep running away.


What is rather ironic is that if you did not insist on running away you would understand the concept by now and would be getting all of the evidence that you wanted.

And as I explained to you, nor is it belittling when I point out that you do not understand the concept of evidence, If I give you more evidence now you will just fail as you did with the case of Lucy again.

By now you've seen it a thousand times, some
creo will breeze in after tanking up on a load
of creofacts from websites.
Then they perform from the script, and after
a while return to creoland where they can report
that they were subjected to velittling, ridicule,
hatred etc- see how dreadful are the enemies of
God-and tell how despite all they argued a whole
roomful of evos to a standstill and departed in triumph.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I’m not going to reply to each in vidual commenting on my “Cambrian“ post, too many.

Let me say this:

When you Google ‘Cambrian’ along with ‘ “sudden appearance” ‘ in quotations, you’ll get so many sites. (‘Cambrian “abrupt appearance” ‘ will also work, and add even more, )

“Sudden” does not mean rapid. It means “immediate”.

The reason for the 10 to 15 million years, was the time for these life forms to populate the oceans… indeed, they’re found just about everywhere.

But of these thousands of species, each one “appeared suddenly.” With no obvious precursors.

I’m tired of people misrepresenting the evidence, in an effort to downplay its significance.

Then stop doing it.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Taking more than 100 years is not quick to anger.
We weren't there and don't know what humans were doing to make God want to wipe out humans.



God is the judge of everyone and all incidencts,,,,,,,,,, the biggest court there is.
And yes the father shares responsibility with the son in your example, but your example might have been a bit better if you had God as the manufacturer of the car and the manufacturer of the alcohol.



I'm trusting that the fulfilled prophecies were fulfilled by God and not humans.



I hear that Tycho Brahe was supported by the church.
I also don't know of punishment for Scopes.
I know what you think of my truth but I was saying that there is truth and error in skeptic arguments and it is best to see them both. That is something that you seem unwilling to believe. Skepticism is only correct in your view. I can understand that view from a skeptic.



Well I should not be surprised at that statement, and I am not.
I was giving an error of skepticism and of course you can't see that error.
But most things take faith to believe. After all I am told that science does not prove anything.



Science knows nothing about whether the universe was designed. Science also does not know where life came from.
These of course are corollaries of being an atheist and so you would lean towards believing that the universe had no designer or life giver even if science does not tell us that.
That's almost faith but worded to eliminate saying that is what you believe. But even if science decided the universe had no designer or life giver and you ended up believing that, it would be faith since science does not prove anything,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, especially about stuff like that.



So you believe nobody has experienced the supernatural and miracles from God.



Who in your mind would be a credible witness for such an event?
It is not the credibility of the witness or witnesses but the event itself that is the problem for you.
What God gave as witness to Jesus is dismissed because of supposed unreliability of the witnesses.
And yes they did suffer for that witness and many lost their lives for that witness.

What witness??

That's what some think from a fossil. But they don't know. And they also don't know when each type of ape burgeoned out and stay in that form. Such as gorillas or chimpanzees, etc. They will guess perhaps but that's about it. I can only imagine that the posture will be that it happened over millions of years and is imagined. Even though there's no evidence of that because so many bones are lost. But that's probably the way it happened, scientists may say, even if they discover something that changes their minds once again. And the conjectures start again.

You really have a lot to learn about science.

 

[SkepticThinker]

As we know, I don't see the flood as global, but whether global or not, without most animals gone, humans (Noah etc) would be the animals' dinners in no time.

Your belief runs contrary to the claims in the Bible.
So what is your belief based on?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Your belief runs contrary to the claims in the Bible..

Are we not supposed to use our common-sense, and not always take ancient scrolls literally?
Did the authors of Genesis know that the earth was a globe with many continents?
(rhetorical question)

 

[SkepticThinker]

Are we not supposed to use our common-sense, and always take ancient scrolls literally?
Did the authors of Genesis know that the earth was a globe with many continents?
(rhetorical question)

The poster I was responding to takes his "information" about Gods, prophecies, etc. from the Bible.
Hence my question to him.

 

[Brian2]

What witness??

Being witnesses of the risen Jesus.

 

[Brian2]

Your belief runs contrary to the claims in the Bible.
So what is your belief based on?

IMO my beliefs are not contrary to the claims in the Bible, just to the common translations of the Bible. Alternative legitimate translations can support a local flood imo.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Being witnesses of the risen Jesus.

There are no such accounts in the Bible. Well, not past the level of hearsay thirty years or more after the fact.

 

[Subduction Zone]

IMO my beliefs are not contrary to the claims in the Bible, just to the common translations of the Bible. Alternative legitimate translations can support a local flood imo.

A local flood would not have solved any problems. Nor would the Ark have ended up on a mountain.

 

[Brian2]

A local flood would not have solved any problems. Nor would the Ark have ended up on a mountain.

The Ark is not said to have ended up on a mountain. It came to rest in what is called the mountains of Ararat. Ararat was a region and the mountains can be seen as the hills in that region.

 

[Brian2]

There are no such accounts in the Bible. Well, not past the level of hearsay thirty years or more after the fact.

The Epistles of Paul are hearsay, much earlier than when the gospels were written, and his audience knew the truth of what he wrote here, that Cephas (Peter) taught the resurrection of Jesus.
1 Corinthians 15:3-11 “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, … that [Jesus] was raised, and that He appeared to Cephas (Peter) then to the twelve.” He adds: “Whether then it was I or they [Peter et al.], so we preach and so you believed.”
Peter and James and the other apostles are reported to be witnesses, which, as I said, the ones to whom he wrote, knew of and may have even heard talking about the resurrection.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Ark is not said to have ended up on a mountain. It came to rest in what is called the mountains of Ararat. Ararat was a region and the mountains can be seen as the hills in that region.

It is a highland and to flood that high would require a worldwide flood.

You need to face facts. During the Babylonian captivity the Hebrew priests took their religion and combined it with that of the Babylonians. Genesis was written much later than literalists believe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Epistles of Paul are hearsay, much earlier than when the gospels were written, and his audience knew the truth of what he wrote here, that Cephas (Peter) taught the resurrection of Jesus.
1 Corinthians 15:3-11 “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, … that [Jesus] was raised, and that He appeared to Cephas (Peter) then to the twelve.” He adds: “Whether then it was I or they [Peter et al.], so we preach and so you believed.”
Peter and James and the other apostles are reported to be witnesses, which, as I said, the ones to whom he wrote, knew of and may have even heard talking about the resurrection.

Yes, I agree. At best even the earliest records are hearsay. That is not very reliable when it comes to evidence.

 

[Brian2]

It is a highland and to flood that high would require a worldwide flood.

You need to face facts. During the Babylonian captivity the Hebrew priests took their religion and combined it with that of the Babylonians. Genesis was written much later than literalists believe.

There is evidence of a very large local flood thousands of years BC in that area.
There are also reasons why the Ark could have landed in the foothills of the Mountains of Ararat even if it started at a lower altitude.
There are also reasons why the flood might have taken so long to subside.

Local Mesopotamian Flood: An Apologia Local Mesopotamian Flood Model: Addressing Criticisms

This is a follow-up to my article, Local Flood & Atheist Ignorance of Christian Thought (7-2-21), and it will deal with some elements of proposed I document several fascinating scientific arguments (from scientists) for a local Mesopotamian Flood c. 2900 BC. The various cumulative evidences are...

www.patheos.com

Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth | National Center for Science Education

Introduction The Bible (Genesis 6–9) describes a worldwide flood (the Noachian Flood) covering even the highest mountains of the earth and the construction of a huge boat (a rectangular box-like craft) that transported animals, at least two of a kind of all land animals on the earth.

ncse.ngo

 

[Brian2]

Yes, I agree. At best even the earliest records are hearsay. That is not very reliable when it comes to evidence.

1Corinthians is said to have been written in the early to mid 50s AD and was being written to people who knew of and probably had heard the witnesses speak. That is pretty good historical hearsay writing when compared to other historical records of events that we have.
For those who do not use the presumption that prophecy is untrue to date the writing of the synoptics to post 70AD,,,,,,,,, those synoptics were probably written not long after the 1Corinthians Epistle and by people who were witnesses and who had heard from witnesses.
John's gospel was written post 70AD through the words of an old man who had been a witness.