Noah's ark found on mt. Ararat in eastern turkey (Baptist, philosophy, genesis)
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.
LOL! code for, I'm wrong so I'm just going to ignore what you posted. Good one!
You apparently only read the first sentence of my reply. I only ignored the ONE portion of your post that was based on admittedly incorrect information. YOU were the one who misquoted the Bible. How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you produce incorrect data?
Then you post:
"My mistake. I need to reread and brush up on my Bible
... but my former points still stand."
You are making conclusions based on admittedly incorrect information, and you think those conclusions should be taken seriously??
On top of that, you're whole post was a blatant side-step of the original question. The original question had nothing to do with what you THOUGHT the Bible said about how many "kinds" of animals were on the ark.
Like I said before, I guess it really is too much to ask for someone to answer a simple question.
The questions are in post #558 in case you have any interest in ACTUALLY answering any of them.
First off, let's clarify here. The bible clearly states that Noah brought one male and one female of every kind of animal.. NOT every species. Noah would not have had to bring a male and female for every species of canine for example.. only one kind from the canine group.. probably a wolf like creature... which would have had the genetic potential to lead to all of the species we see today.
DING DING DING we have a WINNER. The bible provides proof of evolution
Actually it proves the utter absurdity of the bible, but since you all cleave so to the book of fables, and say it proves everything, well that is a double edged sword my friend, and nonsense cuts both ways.l
DING DING DING we have a WINNER. The bible provides proof of evolution
Actually it proves the utter absurdity of the bible, but since you all cleave so to the book of fables, and say it proves everything, well that is a double edged sword my friend, and nonsense cuts both ways.l
And again, I have no problem with what you are referring to as micro-evolution. As I see it, God created man perfect and when he fell, sin entered the world. Organisms went from their perfect state to a state that was ever changing and allowing of mutations or faults. This leads to speciation. This is not a matter of whether or not speciation occurs. It's a matter of whether or not you believe the earth is thousands of years old or billions of years old. "Evolution" that has been observed is no problem for a Christian viewpoint what so ever. This has been scientifically observed and proven. The millions of years evolution that many of you claim is merely speculative and has not been observed, therefore is far from being a "fact".
You apparently only read the first sentence of my reply. I only ignored the ONE portion of your post that was based on admittedly incorrect information. YOU were the one who misquoted the Bible. How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you produce incorrect data?
Then you post:
"My mistake. I need to reread and brush up on my Bible
... but my former points still stand."
You are making conclusions based on admittedly incorrect information, and you think those conclusions should be taken seriously??
On top of that, you're whole post was a blatant side-step of the original question. The original question had nothing to do with what you THOUGHT the Bible said about how many "kinds" of animals were on the ark.
Like I said before, I guess it really is too much to ask for someone to answer a simple question.
The questions are in post #558 in case you have any interest in ACTUALLY answering any of them.
My point still stands. I was addressing the belief that many hold about how many animals were on the ark. There is a wide held belief that Noah would have had to take every species that existed at the time of the flood.. when in fact, he only had to take the "kinds" and not all of the "species".. which would cut down on the number on the ark significantly.
And again, I have no problem with what you are referring to as micro-evolution. As I see it, God created man perfect and when he fell, sin entered the world. Organisms went from their perfect state to a state that was ever changing and allowing of mutations or faults. This leads to speciation. This is not a matter of whether or not speciation occurs. It's a matter of whether or not you believe the earth is thousands of years old or billions of years old. "Evolution" that has been observed is no problem for a Christian viewpoint what so ever. This has been scientifically observed and proven. The millions of years evolution that many of you claim is merely speculative and has not been observed, therefore is far from being a "fact".
Perhaps a bit of a refresher of your statement is appropriate now. You said;
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray34iyf
only one kind from the canine group.. probably a wolf like creature... which would have had the genetic potential to lead to all of the species we see today. Just take the domestication of the dog in today's world. Man took a wild wolf like canine and now we have all the different breeds we see as pets.. the same logic goes for every other animal we see today on earth.
That ain't the micro-evolution you are trying to brand it, now is it, as that would also include the largest animals.
the same logic goes for every other animal we see today on earth.
Sorry for being unclear. I was referring to the fact that all of the different "kinds" had the genetic potential to lead to all of the different species we see within those kinds. ie: common ancestor to all of the canines we see, common ancestor to all of the felines.. etc, etc.
Then why do you have a problem with macro-evolution? Macro-evolution is nothing more than micro-evolution over enormous amounts of time.
The god that you believe in has never been observed either...yet you have no problem with that.
Which is exactly the point. By simply dening any evidence presented for evolution, one is attempting to put it on equal footing with creationism. So creationists can claim that both creation and evolution are "faith-based" beliefs. So it can be claimed that they are equally valid, and both should be taught in science classrooms, or neither, for that matter. This in the Myth of Equivalency.
Then why do you have a problem with macro-evolution? Macro-evolution is nothing more than micro-evolution over enormous amounts of time.
...and that's where it becomes just as much fantasy as you claim something like Christianity is relying on. You have no evidence that there exists the "enormous amounts of time". But since evolution is already correct in the minds of scientists, facts aren't needed to prove it. They use evolution to explain facts instead of the other way around. This is what happens when you don't keep an open mind.
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.
