Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Indeed. I should have mentioned the dishonesty, too. I hate to keep harping on it but then the anti -evolution lobby keep doing so - this misunderstood 'dogs turning into cats' mantra. It is so not what evolution theory is about that it is worse than 'why are there still monkeys?' but we saw that the attempt to explain that it was not evolution theory (and I did attempt to put it into explanatory context (1) was met with 'you can't explain it then, well I win goodbye' (runs away) and the cheap trick of slamming me for not sticking with the video of a supposed authority who came out with the same rubbish is just more creationist trickery.
Maybe I'll have a look at the other videos posted, but it really is pointless. The case has been made on the evidence. I have never denied that a case can be made to dismiss it all. It struck me this morning that the same sort of arguments were used by the flat earth society (2) I have only argued that you need a good deal of eye -shutting to ignore the in your face evidence of macro evolution of the cetan sequence and diniosaurs into birds (dismissed "Archaeopterix" with a slight laugh with no evidence, explanation or argument at all by Expat above, cheered on by Eusebius. I need only point to the grotesque lack of any kind of counter -case).
The pointless point is that, a case can be made, but whether the video makes a valid case for misinterpretation of the evidence or is just a uninformed as Berlinski about what evolution says, it does not do a thing to restore the credit of our Creationists here who have shown the ignorance, denial, dishonesty and not listening, not looking, not wanting to know of the Creationists case, and trying to make out they have a case by posting videos of 'scientists' who are supposed to agree with them. While of course dismissing the massive preponderance of science that says otherwise as some kind of cover -up conspiracy.
I just have to shake my head yet again and wonder why they seem to think they still have any credibility left.
(1) that is that one creature turning into another was - in a way - the same creature evolving into such a different form that it was a 'different' one. It is possible that dogs in five or ten million years would evolve into something different. This cats into dogs argument is simply..ignorant.
(2) There was no proof. There were facts but the interpretations was wrong (explanation of a round the world airliner circling around the circumference - I saw this on TV as a kid) and the majority of scientists were all getting together to deny the facts. It was a worrisome nonsense in the 50's and 60' as was Daniken's gods from outer space stuff a decade later but not such a pain as Creationism, becasue they did not have Fundamentalist Bible -literalism piling in behind it.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-24-2015 at 11:56 PM..
Let's look at this argument that Jesus believed the Genesis account. I jokily argued that apologetics can get over this and referred to a couple of explanations.
Mar 5:31 And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
Luke 8:45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
One can either say he knew very well but was making a teaching -point, or he (as wholly man as well as wholly God) had some things kept from him.
Either way this explains why he would use Genesis or indeed the unbelievable story of Jonah to make a teaching point, whether or not he believed it.
The same with the Syrio -Phonecian woman. Did he know that he was going to help her in the end, but was just letting her 'talk him around' or he has that outcome hidden from him? Either way, it works.
Let's look at this argument that Jesus believed the Genesis account. I jokily argued that apologetics can get over this and referred to a couple of explanations.
Mar 5:31 And his disciples said unto him, Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
Luke 8:45 And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me?
One can either say he knew very well but was making a teaching -point, or he (as wholly man as well as wholly God) had some things kept from him.
Either way this explains why he would use Genesis or indeed the unbelievable story of Jonah to make a teaching point, whether or not he believed it.
The same with the Syrio -Phonecian woman. Did he know that he was going to help her in the end, but was just letting her 'talk him around' or he has that outcome hidden from him? Either way, it works.
The story of Jonah is an historic account. He was swallowed by a sea monster. Just because you don't understand such a thing does not mean it didn't happen. It just means you don't understand it and try to import your ignorance of the matter into the historic account.
I don't understand your argument. What does whether or not Jesus knew who touched Him have anything to do with what He believed as to the Genesis account?
He as well as the Jews took the Genesis account as a literal historic document of beginnings:
Beginning of the heavens and earth
Beginnings of plants
Beginning of animals
Beginning of humanity
Beginning of the Patriarchs
Beginning of the genealogies etc.
Beginning of sin and death
New beginning after world wide flood
This shows the Jews in Jesus day took the historic document of Genesis to be the truth:
Mar 10:6 Jesus said: "Yet from the beginning of creation God makes them male and female.
Luk 3:38 of Enosh, of Seth, of Adam, of God."
It doesn't say "of Enosh, of Seth, of Adam, of knuckle dragger, of chimp, of lizard, of fish, of multi-celled amoeba, of single celled amoeba, of God.
Luk_3:38 of Enosh, of Seth, of Adam, of God."
The apostle Paul wrote:
Rom_5:14 nevertheless death reigns from Adam unto Moses, over those also who do not sin in the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him Who is about to be."
1Co_15:22 For even as, in Adam, all are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all be vivified."
1Co_15:45 If there is a soulish body, there is a spiritual also. Thus it is written also, The first man, Adam, "became a living soul:the last Adam a vivifying Spirit."
1Ti_2:13 (for Adam was first molded, thereafter Eve,
1Ti_2:14 and Adam was not seduced, yet the woman, being deluded, has come to be in the transgression)."
Jude wrote:
Jud_1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesies to these also, saying, "Lo! the Lord came among ten thousand of His saints,
The Jews knew much more about their historic documents than you do thousands of years removed.
I think if Jesus and the writers of the New Testament believed Adam and Eve were created by God and not evolved from whatever, then Christians have every right to believe they were created too by God and not believe the false, unprovable premise of evolution.
Indeed. I should have mentioned the dishonesty, too. I hate to keep harping on it but then the anti -evolution lobby keep doing so - this misunderstood 'dogs turning into cats' mantra. It is so not what evolution theory is about that it is worse than 'why are there still monkeys?' but we saw that the attempt to explain that it was not evolution theory (and I did attempt to put it into explanatory context (1) was met with 'you can't explain it then, well I win goodbye' (runs away) and the cheap trick of slamming me for not sticking with the video of a supposed authority who came out with the same rubbish is just more creationist trickery.
The real dishonesty is from the evolution lobby. They are the ones who have used trickery over the years by using a part of a jaw and building a human looking ape from it not to mention all the other tricks they have pulled out of their sleeves and hats. They are modern day magicians.
Quote:
Maybe I'll have a look at the other videos posted, but it really is pointless. The case has been made on the evidence. I have never denied that a case can be made to dismiss it all. It struck me this morning that the same sort of arguments were used by the flat earth society (2) I have only argued that you need a good deal of eye -shutting to ignore the in your face evidence of macro evolution of the cetan sequence and diniosaurs into birds (dismissed "Archaeopterix" with a slight laugh with no evidence, explanation or argument at all by Expat above, cheered on by Eusebius. I need only point to the grotesque lack of any kind of counter -case).
Yes, there is a grotesque lack of any kind of counter-case against creationism.
Quote:
The pointless point is that, a case can be made, but whether the video makes a valid case for misinterpretation of the evidence or is just a uninformed as Berlinski about what evolution says, it does not do a thing to restore the credit of our Creationists here who have shown the ignorance, denial, dishonesty and not listening, not looking, not wanting to know of the Creationists case, and trying to make out they have a case by posting videos of 'scientists' who are supposed to agree with them. While of course dismissing the massive preponderance of science that says otherwise as some kind of cover -up conspiracy.
The real cover-up conspiracy comes from the evolutionists. Darwinianism has proven to have many fallacies. I wish to thank all the evolutionists here who have shown their ignorance and unwittingly furthered the truth of creationism.
Quote:
I just have to shake my head yet again and wonder why they seem to think they still have any credibility left.
Keep shaking your head at the facts. Evolution is going down as an unprovable idea. Evolutionists have no credibility especially after all their trickery.
Quote:
(1) that is that one creature turning into another was - in a way - the same creature evolving into such a different form that it was a 'different' one. It is possible that dogs in five or ten million years would evolve into something different. This cats into dogs argument is simply..ignorant.
Amoebas stay amoebas. Amoebas do not morph into a creature other than another amoeba. If single celled amoebas kick started all life on earth as our trickster, huckster, snake-oil salesmen, the evolutionists have proclaimed, then they have to PROVE all life on earth evolved from these single cells. They cannot. It is impossible. Yet with some rather clever cartoons, they have advanced their untennable position to that of fact in the minds of the unlearned.
Quote:
(2) There was no proof. There were facts but the interpretations was wrong (explanation of a round the world airliner circling around the circumference - I saw this on TV as a kid) and the majority of scientists were all getting together to deny the facts. It was a worrisome nonsense in the 50's and 60' as was Daniken's gods from outer space stuff a decade later but not such a pain as Creationism, becasue they did not have Fundamentalist Bible -literalism piling in behind it.
Yes, there was no proof of evolution. There were no facts. It was all just based on misunderstandings and pushed by the no-Goders. Darwin had an axe to grind against God and evolution was a tool he used to further his ignorance.
The story of Jonah is an historic account. He was swallowed by a sea monster. Just because you don't understand such a thing does not mean it didn't happen. It just means you don't understand it and try to import your ignorance of the matter into the historic account.
I don't understand your argument. What does whether or not Jesus knew who touched Him have anything to do with what He believed as to the Genesis account?
He as well as the Jews took the Genesis account as a literal historic document of beginnings:
Beginning of the heavens and earth
Beginnings of plants
Beginning of animals
Beginning of humanity
Beginning of the Patriarchs
Beginning of the genealogies etc.
Beginning of sin and death
New beginning after world wide flood
This shows the Jews in Jesus day took the historic document of Genesis to be the truth:
Mar 10:6 Jesus said: "Yet from the beginning of creation God makes them male and female.
Luk 3:38 of Enosh, of Seth, of Adam, of God."
It doesn't say "of Enosh, of Seth, of Adam, of knuckle dragger, of chimp, of lizard, of fish, of multi-celled amoeba, of single celled amoeba, of God.
Luk_3:38 of Enosh, of Seth, of Adam, of God."
The apostle Paul wrote:
Rom_5:14 nevertheless death reigns from Adam unto Moses, over those also who do not sin in the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him Who is about to be."
1Co_15:22 For even as, in Adam, all are dying, thus also, in Christ, shall all be vivified."
1Co_15:45 If there is a soulish body, there is a spiritual also. Thus it is written also, The first man, Adam, "became a living soul:the last Adam a vivifying Spirit."
1Ti_2:13 (for Adam was first molded, thereafter Eve,
1Ti_2:14 and Adam was not seduced, yet the woman, being deluded, has come to be in the transgression)."
Jude wrote:
Jud_1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesies to these also, saying, "Lo! the Lord came among ten thousand of His saints,
The Jews knew much more about their historic documents than you do thousands of years removed.
I think if Jesus and the writers of the New Testament believed Adam and Eve were created by God and not evolved from whatever, then Christians have every right to believe they were created too by God and not believe the false, unprovable premise of evolution.
That is really what the thread is about, isn't it? I am afraid that I can't accept the historicity of the truly absurd Jonah story on your say -so old chum. But I have to go with the evidence - that it is impossible to believe it really happened, either swallowing of a human by a fish and him surviving, or even worse going to the capital of the Assyrian empire and getting them to repent. Believe it if you want, but save yourself the trouble of trying to sell it to me.
And to the readers, if you must believe that story rather than seeing it as a tall tale to make a teaching point, then maybe you must deny the evidence for evolution on the basis of bible -literalism. But then you have got to believe that the story of Job is also literal and the shekel -eating fish, because you can't pick and choose what's metaphor and what's true.
If however, those of you who already see Job and Jonah as improbable stories and the flood and Eden as mythological guesswork, if not symbolic teaching tales, and you also rather doubt the shekel eating fish (I presume you know the story) and probably Matthew's daft angel perching on the tomb door and you see the clear implications of Jesus sometimes not knowing things as described in the gospels and completely ignored by Eusebius in favour of his own Bible -literalist beliefs, then there is no reason why a view of plant, animal and indeed human evolution cannot be accepted on the evidence rather than rejected on faith in human - swallowing fishes.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 01-25-2015 at 07:20 AM..
I used to be a staunch pro-evolution person, but over time I have come to discover that the theory of evolution is based on as much faith as the theory of creation. I think the only one who knows for sure is God.
The real dishonesty is from the evolution lobby. They are the ones who have used trickery over the years by using a part of a jaw and building a human looking ape from it not to mention all the other tricks they have pulled out of their sleeves and hats. They are modern day magicians.
Yes, there is a grotesque lack of any kind of counter-case against creationism.
The real cover-up conspiracy comes from the evolutionists. Darwinianism has proven to have many fallacies. I wish to thank all the evolutionists here who have shown their ignorance and unwittingly furthered the truth of creationism.
Keep shaking your head at the facts. Evolution is going down as an unprovable idea. Evolutionists have no credibility especially after all their trickery.
Amoebas stay amoebas. Amoebas do not morph into a creature other than another amoeba. If single celled amoebas kick started all life on earth as our trickster, huckster, snake-oil salesmen, the evolutionists have proclaimed, then they have to PROVE all life on earth evolved from these single cells. They cannot. It is impossible. Yet with some rather clever cartoons, they have advanced their untennable position to that of fact in the minds of the unlearned.
Yes, there was no proof of evolution. There were no facts. It was all just based on misunderstandings and pushed by the no-Goders. Darwin had an axe to grind against God and evolution was a tool he used to further his ignorance.
I need hardly add anything to this diatribe with more misrepresentation, denial, conspiracy accusation and -yes - projection (accusing the other side of what you do yourself), than the museums contain evidence of evolution.
I commend Eusebius to your evaluation. I simply cannot add anything more.
I used to be a staunch pro-evolution person, but over time I have come to discover that the theory of evolution is based on as much faith as the theory of creation. I think the only one who knows for sure is God.
Well, you have the right to your views, but I think that a re-appraisal might change your mind about how strong the evidence is these days. Of course Eusebius and expat have a case (though they don't use it) that you can also explain the species as 'just made that way', the strata (well, no, not really but never mind) DNA and morphology (well, no, not really but 'God just made them like that' will do if you really don't want to accept the evidence) and of course no proof of abiogenesis and no proof of the 'somebody was there filming it' kind, which then would be denounced as a fake by the coterie of atheist scientists, even if it could be done - just as the last Flat Earthists denounced the space photos as massive fake.
Have no doubts about this: Creationism is the Flat Earthism of today.
Actually, evolution is the flat earthism of today. Evolution will go the way of the dinosaur.
Flat Earthism was never accepted by science, but was the fad and cult of a bunch of enthusiasts, including, regrettably, some with some kind of qualification. Their Authority was wagged about just as Creationists do, now, in efforts to convince others of the truth of their absurdity.
I am confident that the facts will pile up as they have been doing - more and more and ALL of it indicating evolution. I could sit back and leave it to science, but, unfortunately some areas of religion have been persuaded that they have to choose between evolution and God. so they are using all their money, political clout and religious influence (and media -control) to try to suppress those areas of science (1) deemed to be in conflict with their genesis -literalist beliefs.
At least I have to show that this is not true at all in addition to trying to collapse the massive strawman of 'Evilooshun' as perpetrated by Genesis -literalist Creationists.
(1) Folks - You have got to stop them doing it, or America will be out of step with everyone but the more fanatical fundamentalist Muslims and ultra -orthodox Jews. Be quite clear about this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
