#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
The problem with evolution can be described with an analogy.
Let's use a computer as an analogy for the human brain.
There are many different types of brains, just like there are many different types of computers. You have PCs, Macs, tablets/phones, tiny, wearable, computing devices, calculators, super computers, etc. So a human brain can be a supercomputer and a dog's brain can be a calculator.
Now, these computers all need an operating system, like Windows, OS-X, IOS, Android, Linux, Etc. The operating system can represent sentience.
But in order for computers to do useful stuff, they need aps, like Microsoft Word, Photoshop, VLC, etc. This can be human knowledge and reason.
Ok. Ready? Here we go.
We are expected to believe that a super computer evolved, with Linux installed and a number of aps? That's Quite a lot to happen all by itself. Can we reasonably expect to find a similar machine on some distant planet, half burried in sand? I mean, don't you find that just as incredible as what religion teaches?
I'll stick with evolution.
Side Score: 87
|
I have my own ideas.
Side Score: 66
|
|
Yes, that is as incredible as what religion believes, because that is what religion believes. Evolution says a distant planet would have a different computer system, and religion says the computer system would be the same since it came from the same source. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
2
points
1
point
That is an interesting question. I just got through telling you that evolution would lead to a different computer and you just keep talking about the same computers we have here. If computers could evolve they would be different than the ones we see on Earth. You don't understand the word different, so you can't participate in a discussion about a process that creates stuff that is different. I am saying computers would evolve, you are saying they wouldn't to disprove evolution remember. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
Why would chemical reactions need to survive? To keep producing chemical reactions. Why would they come together to form life? There is enough energy to sustain them. And more importantly, why would they need sentience? They don't, unless you think bacteria have sentience. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
life evolves because life changes. mutations occurring randomly throughout all life bring small changes to it. if the changes make that organism more successful it is more likely to (in the case of life) survive. evolution needs a drive such as survival to give these mutations a direction of progression. mutations that do not contribute to a specific goal (survival) are killed off by predators or bad compatibility with environment. computers do not evolve because they lack any process of change. no change means no evolution in any direction for any purpose. computers also have no goal or selection process other than what is prescribed, so were they to evolve, the results would be random, and in most cases detrimental to the initial function of the computer. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
Yes they are equally incredible. . They both seem to leave a lot to imagination. But if you investigate God from more than one study of just Evolution, like in History, in Archiology, in Prophetic Accuracy, and in Logic, then Creation and the Divine Intruder is much more established with sound proof that Evolution would be when presented absent from the Divine Intrusion of the Creator! Side: I have my own ideas.
Any time you study one and not the other you will be inclined to believe the one you studied. When you study both, the only way Creation is possible is if God created the universe and then life, and let evolution take over, but that is not the Creation story. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
That's the point. When we go to trial, we include every source of evidence all prespective, not just from sources that support a pre determinef conclusion. Investigation and trial without an independent fair objective investigation is a mistrial. The determination is beyond a reasonable doubt. After all the evidence is looked at, we all make a jury decision. And it is applied to what we conclude. After all the evidence is given an objective review, do we find God Exists beyond a reasonable doubt, or that He doesn't exist beyond a reasonable doubt. If evidence is excluded from objective reviw, you don't have a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt, all you have is a mistrial! . Side: I have my own ideas.
That isn't true at all. If you take God, evolution, and science they don't work together. If you take out evolution it doesn't work either, but if you take out God it works. If you mean that you have to doubt parts of science to believe in God, I agree. And the doubt involved with believing in God is definitely well beyond reasonable. Is that what you mean? Because that makes sense. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
I don't see it that way, and much of evolution is based on finding parts of cell clusters that are similar, but it's guess work still. Even if you say there are four cell cluster of puzzle pieces in a species, it's assembly is still guess work. So you act as if Evolution has no disputing theories. It does so this isn't an open and shut case, so why do you think it is? Side: I have my own ideas.
http://biologos.org/common-questions/ Extended Evolutionary Synthesis vs. Modern Synthesis Some scientists today support what is increasingly being called the “Extended Evolutionary Synthesis” (EES). They challenge the gene-centric idea that variation comes entirely from genetic mutation and that selection merely reflects changes in the frequency of genes. They claim instead that organisms—not genes—should be the focal point of evolution to better account for how organisms co-construct and co-evolve with their environments. On this view random genetic mutations and natural selection continue to play a vital role in evolution, but so do other factors. These include: Developmental bias: how the embryonic development of organisms biases ways in which changes in their forms can occur. Phenotypic plasticity: physiological variability that leads to flexibility in the appearance and function of organisms. Niche construction: the fact that organisms do not live in isolation from their environments, and they can affect the niche in which they live and so affect their survival chances. Extra-genetic inheritance: some aspects of inheritance do not act at the level of the building blocks of DNA, but involve modifications to the proteins that package DNA or even the transmission of social behavior through cultural evolution. While the EES biologists think these additions to evolutionary theory are sufficiently important to warrant a renaming of the theory itself, many other evolutionary scientists disagree. They prefer the label “Modern Synthesis” as broad enough to encompass these and other developments in the theory of evolution since Darwin. This label also has a history, but those who use it today usually mean simply that evolution takes place through the general categories of variation and selection. Its proponents are content to allow research into specific mechanisms for these to proceed under this label without needing an “extension” to the theory. Again, none of these groups denies common ancestry, but they do disagree about the extent to which major changes are required in how we think about evolutionary theory. - See more at: http://biologos.org/common-questions/ Side: I have my own ideas.
http://biologos.org/common-questions/ Extended Evolutionary Synthesis vs. Modern Synthesis Some scientists today support what is increasingly being called the “Extended Evolutionary Synthesis” (EES). They challenge the gene-centric idea that variation comes entirely from genetic mutation and that selection merely reflects changes in the frequency of genes. They claim instead that organisms—not genes—should be the focal point of evolution to better account for how organisms co-construct and co-evolve with their environments. On this view random genetic mutations and natural selection continue to play a vital role in evolution, but so do other factors. These include: Developmental bias: how the embryonic development of organisms biases ways in which changes in their forms can occur. Phenotypic plasticity: physiological variability that leads to flexibility in the appearance and function of organisms. Niche construction: the fact that organisms do not live in isolation from their environments, and they can affect the niche in which they live and so affect their survival chances. Extra-genetic inheritance: some aspects of inheritance do not act at the level of the building blocks of DNA, but involve modifications to the proteins that package DNA or even the transmission of social behavior through cultural evolution. While the EES biologists think these additions to evolutionary theory are sufficiently important to warrant a renaming of the theory itself, many other evolutionary scientists disagree. They prefer the label “Modern Synthesis” as broad enough to encompass these and other developments in the theory of evolution since Darwin. This label also has a history, but those who use it today usually mean simply that evolution takes place through the general categories of variation and selection. Its proponents are content to allow research into specific mechanisms for these to proceed under this label without needing an “extension” to the theory. Again, none of these groups denies common ancestry, but they do disagree about the extent to which major changes are required in how we think about evolutionary theory. - See more at: http://biologos.org/common-questions/ Side: I have my own ideas.
We have seen one species turn into another species, so yes. Lizards. I already gave you that example. Organisms are able to change and adapt over time by reproduction and mutation. Organisms that can adapt to the environment will survive and continue reproducing. These adaptations are a part of natural selection. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
What species did lizards become? Which mammals have done this? Birds and fish, bugs and plants are unique. Even creation spells that out. God created fish and birds on a separate day. He made mammals and man on a separate day. And my next point could it be that on day 3 when God seemingly left growth to enrich the earth, that everything needed to make fish and birds was present and accounted for by day 5 For God to assemble. And then the same with the dirt of the earth? Then that brings me to this point, if God used this process seen in evolution for assembly, then wouldn't it make sense to have the progression we see in creation? After all if this is just a fantastic story order doesn't matter and the ancient guy would have any science basis to give this order. Plant growth, simple cells, and bugs. Fish and Birds Mammals and Man . Wouldn't this be the logic of order followed in evolution?? . Side: I have my own ideas.
How did this fossilized in 40 years? http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/ The Colombian grandmother was thought to have gastroenteritis but an X-ray showed a petrified foetus in her abdomen. Further tests at the emergency centre in capital Bogota revealed an 18-inch-long foetus, weighing 4lb, which is thought to have been inside the woman for at least four decades. It is thought that the condition was caused by a rare medical phenomenon, called lithopedion. This occurs when, unknown to the mother, a baby develops outside of the uterus then dies. Unable to expel the foetus, the body covers it with calcium to protect the mother from infection, effectively turning it to stone. Side: I have my own ideas.
You answered it takes 10000 years to fossilized. Then why was this fossilized in 40 years???? The Colombian grandmother was thought to have gastroenteritis but an X-ray showed a petrified foetus in her abdomen. Further tests at the emergency centre in capital Bogota revealed an 18-inch-long foetus, weighing 4lb, which is thought to have been inside the woman for at least four decades. It is thought that the condition was caused by a rare medical phenomenon, called lithopedion. This occurs when, unknown to the mother, a baby develops outside of the uterus then dies. Unable to expel the foetus, the body covers it with calcium to protect the mother from infection, effectively turning it to stone. http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/ * Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
The trick here is with an ambiguity in the definition of the word fossil. A fossil is generally defined as being in the distant past, of a previous geological age, prehistoric, or older than 10,000 years, etc. - (it came from a Latin word meaning dig up.), but is also used at times to describe anything that has been petrified. There are several ways that remains are preserved through time (petrified) with varying amounts of time required. Calcification - like that found in the "stone baby" (lithopedion) happens in a relatively short period of time - for instance "most adults greater than 60 years old have calcium deposits in their blood vessels" (ref) - see also: ear petrification (ref) Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
1
point
1
point
I think mutations might occur in simple form before us, like cancer. Does cancer mutate? And germs, bacteria, and viruses, do they mutate? We see mutation in front of us.They "spread, mutate and grow and as stated in Genesis 1: 3 "and its just so." Its currupted seed. You may be correct, some basics you know about evolution may actually be a reality. Like on Day 3, He planted some plants and said "and it is so.and others He planted, and "saw it was good." In Genesis 3, God tells the serpent, He will put enmity between his seed and the women's sees. Currupted seed, God brought Light into the darkness. I don't think we all had a clear idea of the text, but now in the 6 the Day, and the 6000th year He is revealing more as our time on concludes. From what I Ive seen and read in the bible, I think it may suggests each Day of Creation was millions of years, since time was created to govern man. But I think it Satan's fall was part of creation. When Satan fell, remember he was a star, The Great Morning Star Lucifer," as Jesus said, I saw Satan fall "the In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. 6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. 8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
Really because the poster "justignoreme" declared in the field of science and biology, gave bacteria mutating against antibiotic as an example. So creationist don't understand what exactly? See below video clearly explaining it to me. JustIgnoreMe(2257) 1 point Um, of course... I didn't realize that you don't even think mutations occur - I guess we have our work cut out for us... watch for yourself 1 day ago Support Dispute Clarify Report Jump to Debate→ Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
Bacteria mutating against antibiotics is an example of mutation. But you said "I think mutations might occur in simple form before us, like cancer. Does cancer mutate? And germs, bacteria, and viruses, do they mutate?" The thing is, cancer itself is a mutation, so when you ask "does cancer mutate", you seem to demonstrate a fundamental lack of understanding regarding molecular biology. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Or it was rhetorical. The point is, known mutations we can observe are disease related. Disease breaks down destroys ages and dies. I think it is curious that on Day 3, there was spread outwardly, non-vascular plants without photosynthesis synthesis, and mutations grew through those plants and notated to other forms. And evolution who places eternal hope on evolution, places value only on evolution and denies God, while blaming Him (if He exists) on the growth of seed of sin, disease and troubles. Their God is evolution, God created man to live eternity, the fall dropped him into this evolving world of spreading mutations and then chose it's image - mutations, of which the only known mutations are disease related, and even if you add immunizations, which have been linked to brain damage and the growth of other mutations that spread sickness by working mutations around immunizations and antibiotics, growing into super destructive mutations. The god of this world is this seed! In thinking about the forehead and the man in the image of beast, the frontal lobes are found at the forehead, where the mark of the beast or as evolution describes man as beast or animal also, but the frontal lobes are not primitive. They are behavior, free will, voluntary movements like with the "hand." Decisions of the frontal lobes are directed. Behaviors, Decisions, Reasoning, Justifications, Personality, Free Will, Memory... Conscious, the mind of thought, logic, and reason! Revelation 14:9 Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, Daniel 4:16 “Let his mind be changed from that of a man And let a beast’s mind be given to him, And let seven periods of time pass over him. . Roman 1 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. . 2 Corinthians 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. . Frontal lobes control not the movement of hand but what the hand is to do in its movement. Interesting the biblical texts makes many references to the mind of the beast, and Mark of beast being on the forehead, where behaviour is known in science to have jurisdiction. . So Christian are also marked and sealed, on their frontal lobes or forehead also. God as far back as Deuteronomy said write His Word on door posts of house, the "frontals" of our foreheads, and in our mouths. The "frontal" lobes!! Ephesians 4:30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 1 Corinthians 2:16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ. Job 9:7 Who commands the sun not to shine, And sets a seal upon the stars; Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Everyone who names the name of the Lord is to abstain from wickedness.” The secular video below discusses frontal lobes and I find it interesting that it is the final highest development in evolution, as well as in full maturity growth in the individual. Interesting! So insisted by atheists and evolution we are beasts and animals! And the bible is clear the mark of the beast is an image of a beast. Get the picture? Did God foretell science and evolution? Seems to have, are they seared Now the other interesting thing in Genesis 1 is before the animal and plant kingdom classifications existed, they were first discussed in Genesis 1. So Genesis gave a scientist an idea, and the scientist got credit, even though it took 1000's of years later to be aware. FYI all you science freaks, it's in Genesis 1! ARISTOTLE - 4th century BC (384 to322 BC) Greek philosopher divided organisms into 2 groups - plants and animals divided animals into blood and bloodless also divided animals into 3 groups according to how they moved - walking, flying, or swimming (land, air, or water) his system was used into the 1600's So shouldn't the Hebrew prophet be the father of clasifications in science in schools? So why isn't Genesis taught as establishing the 1st documented classifications of living things? Genesis 1 plant life 11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind . 21 God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; . 25 ... beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind. . 26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 29 Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food” In contrast, there is another image, so God let you all be beasts and animals evolved from animals to be advanced animal life. You fished what you wished! Romans 1 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
known mutations we can observe are disease related We also observe beneficial mutations. From AnswersInGenesis: "Another mutation of E. coli facilitated amino acid catabolism under starvation conditions, enabling the mutant to outcompete the parental wild-type. This increased catabolism resulted from a genomic rearrangement (Figure 3). The first step of this rearrangement was insertion of an indigenous IS5 element between the promoter and a CRP-binding site (catabolite regulatory protein) of the starvation inducible cstA gene." and: "Hence, certain environmental conditions seem to favor bacteria with specific genes duplicated. This may have provided the organism a temporary increase in gene expression of those duplicated genes, which apparently helped the organism cope with the higher temperature." See also: Side: I have my own ideas.
Bacteria growth that's compatible with our bodies has always existed and grown also. But is it becoming something different to our final greatness? And so has other sequence of cells. We wouldn't have survived without it. So science is taking something that is and growing more of it. Is it the same as growing a virus? We had light and nutrition built into our bodies and our food. And you can call some of our advancements mutations as well. Some are using our resources at optimum levels, but most are comsuming us as viruses. We have good bacteria, we had to have it build in to us to survive this festering environmental factors. And to last as long as we did. It's like an inoculation of good bacteria to be resistant to bad bacteria. We also made irrigations to bring water to barren lands. And other resourceful mutations toward avvancements. There is a measure of grace, but that comes from God, and soon will not. He rains on the righteous and also the unrighteous. Man is meant to survive for his numbered days, but the decay will enter in to our cures and if we are here long enough we will see the shape-shifter greed of man. And this is prophesy as well. Genesis 3 22 Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever” 23 therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden, (to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. Adam was taken from the ground outside of Eden) 24 So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life. . Bacteria frequently develop mutations that enable them to survive and adapt to a variety of environmental conditions. These mutations are generated by many different mechanisms, and provide a wide range of phenotypic modifications. However, most of these mutations can be classified as a form of antagonistic pleiotropy. Some existing systems are sacrificed as a means for surviving certain environments. Antagonistic pleiotropy is a useful feature of a creation model. Bacteria face a variety of environmental conditions and stressful situations. However, in order to survive, they must contend with any environmental condition that confronts them. Antagonistic pleiotropy provides them genetic mechanisms where they can make specific (and potentially detrimental) genetic changes that will then serve in a particular environment. If the environmental conditions change, the mutation usually becomes less beneficial and perhaps even detrimental. Hence, these mutations do not provide a genetic mechanism that accounts for the origin of biological systems or functions. Rather, they require the prior existence of the targeted cellular systems. As such, beneficial mutations of bacteria fit concisely within a creation model where (a) biological systems and functions were fully formed at creation, (b) subsequent mutations can provide conditional benefits that enable the organism to survive harsh conditions even though the mutation is generally degenerative, and (c) most bacteria need the ability to rapidly adapt to ever changing environments and food sources. . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Or it was rhetorical. The point is, known mutations we can observe are disease related. Disease breaks down destroys ages and dies. I think it is curious that on Day 3, there was spread outwardly, non-vascular plants without photosynthesis synthesis, and mutations grew through those plants and notated to other forms. And evolution who places eternal hope on evolution, places value only on evolution and denies God, while blaming Him (if He exists) on the growth of seed of sin, disease and troubles. Their God is evolution, God created man to live eternity, the fall dropped him into this evolving world of spreading mutations and then chose it's image - mutations, of which the only known mutations are disease related, and even if you add immunizations, which have been linked to brain damage and the growth of other mutations that spread sickness by working mutations around immunizations and antibiotics, growing into super destructive mutations. The god of this world is this seed! Mutating In thinking about the forehead and the man in the image of beast, the frontal lobes are found at the forehead, where the mark of the beast or as evolution describes man as beast or animal also, but the frontal lobes are not primitive. They are behavior, free will, voluntary movements like with the "hand." Decisions of the frontal lobes are directed. Behaviors, Decisions, Reasoning, Justifications, Personality, Free Will, Memory... Conscious, the Mind of Thought, Logic, and Reason! Here God marks the mind a beast and animal, in the frontal lobes (science) on forehead - forehead defined biblically, God said scientific facts - frontal lobes - Behavior, Memory, Decission, On Purpose, Mind, Concious, Wisdom, Reasoning, Understanding, Advancements. Frontal lobes, forehead. Hand, whatever you put your hand to leads you! Marked forehead and hand! Revelation 14:9 Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, Daniel 4:16 “Let his mind be changed from that of a man And let a beast’s mind be given to him, And let seven periods of time pass over him. . Roman 1 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. . 2 Corinthians 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. . Frontal lobes control not the movement of hand but what the hand is to do in its movement. Interesting the biblical texts makes many references to the mind of the beast, and Mark of beast being on the forehead, where behaviour is known in science to have jurisdiction. . So Christian are also marked and sealed, on their frontal lobes or forehead also. God as far back as Deuteronomy said write His Word on door posts of house, the "frontals" of our foreheads, and in our mouths. The "frontal" lobes!! Ephesians 4:30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 1 Corinthians 2:16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ. Job 9:7 Who commands the sun not to shine, And sets a seal upon the stars; Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Everyone who names the name of the Lord is to abstain from wickedness.” The secular video below discusses frontal lobes and I find it interesting that it is the final highest development in evolution, as well as in full maturity growth in the individual. Interesting! So insisted by atheists and evolution we are beasts and animals! And the bible is clear the mark of the beast is an image of a beast. Get the picture? Did God foretell science and evolution? Seems to have, are they seared Now the other interesting thing in Genesis 1 is before the animal and plant kingdom classifications existed, they were first discussed in Genesis 1. So Genesis gave a scientist an idea, and the scientist got credit, even though it took 1000's of years later to be aware. FYI all you science freaks, it's in Genesis 1! ARISTOTLE - 4th century BC (384 to322 BC) Greek philosopher divided organisms into 2 groups - plants and animals divided animals into blood and bloodless also divided animals into 3 groups according to how they moved - walking, flying, or swimming (land, air, or water) his system was used into the 1600's So shouldn't the Hebrew prophet be the father of clasifications in science in schools? So why isn't Genesis taught as establishing the 1st documented classifications of living things? Genesis 1 plant life 11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind . 21 God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; . 25 ... beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind. . 26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 29 Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food” In contrast, there is another image, so God let you all be beasts and animals evolved from animals to be advanced animal life. You fished what you wished! Romans 1 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
1
point
God created man to live eternity Nope. The reason Adam and Eve were supposedly kicked out of the Garden of Eden was because the garden contained another tree (the tree of life) which would allow them to live forever - meaning they weren't going to live forever initially. And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” -Genesis 3:22 Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Or it was rhetorical. The point is, the visible known mutations that we can observe are disease related to decay and more disease, not creating life. Disease spreads, and mutates. Their seeds of the shape-shifter, we can literally see why Jesus said your fathers the Devil. I see the resemlance of his image on the frontals of your forehead! Mutations are your god. The deciever, the shape shifter, the father of lies. The law of sin and death, his world in decay, because he is a god not God! Mutations can't create, something from nothing they scribble a picture and call it art, curruptions spread is of the destroyer left out of the garden to grow. The dust of the ground cursed decling, aging, and dieing. What healthy to form greater life do we know of to physically observe? Even vaccines for the better, are his seeds growing the world in further decay, Flurthering the spread of a super mutations, the shape-shifter monouvering in the dark infecting and mutating and spreading out like moss. And Satan has the audacity to challenge God by saying he made a man? Satan could not make man, but you all are choosing theq mark of the beast, the shape-shifter. You all place eternal hope in evolution and deny the God of all eternity! You all raise a fist blaming God, angry at Him, a God you don't believe exists. But your god is evolution of decay, even though God created man to live eternity. You're going the opposite way. The fall from perfection dropped man into a festering fast spreading virus. Festering was growing their seed and all were currupt seed and we would have desroyed ourselves long before now. The 1st world spread out faster than up, that's why He had to rest it. with these dark seeds growing, spreading, and shapesfifting mutations. But these seeds of shape-shifter not men in the image of God, not the ones who walk upright, the Gods man in God's image in man. Sons growing up with face toward the sun. You man is going backward, with bent over spine, with face toward the dirt. God's children are vascular plants reaching growing face toward the sun. But slaves in the darkness and just slithering spread like mutating fungus on the dirt of the ground, like your father the shape-shifter slithering serpent. Deceiving and mutating his image - as your race becomes one with the him in dark depth of Sheol. As we grow to become one with the light. Thats,separating sheep from goats, wheat and tares, etc.. of which the only known mutations are disease related, and even if you add immunizations, which have been linked to brain damage and the growth of other mutations that spread sickness by working mutations around immunizations and antibiotics, growing into super destructive mutations. The god of this world is born out of darkness, and this his his sperm seed! The Growing, mutating, and spreading disease, hate, coldness, and you are all going "viral" you are mutating fools! "A fool has said in his heart there is no God." God names you one name fits all because you are the common growth mutating on the darkness. Your name -- "a Fool!" There is your Nobel Prize, and your intellect, and arrogance! You all will be driven mad, and there will be no light of day! The darkness is swallowing you all up, and when the door is shut you won't ever get free. You are all being taken going, going, gone! In thinking about the forehead and the man in the image of beast, the frontal lobes are found at the forehead, where the mark of the beast or as evolution describes man as beast or animal also, but the frontal lobes are not primitive. They are behavior, free will, voluntary movements like with the "hand." Decisions of the frontal lobes are directed. Behaviors, Decisions, Reasoning, Justifications, Personality, Free Will, Memory... Conscious, the Mind of Thought, Logic, and Reason! Here God marks the mind a beast and animal, in the frontal lobes (science) on forehead - forehead defined biblically, God said scientific facts - frontal lobes - Behavior, Memory, Decission, On Purpose, Mind, Concious, Wisdom, Reasoning, Understanding, Advancements. Frontal lobes, forehead. Hand, whatever you put your hand to leads you! Marked forehead and hand! Revelation 14:9 Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, Daniel 4:16 “Let his mind be changed from that of a man And let a beast’s mind be given to him, And let seven periods of time pass over him. . Roman 1 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. . 2 Corinthians 4:4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. . Frontal lobes control not the movement of hand but what the hand is to do in its movement. Interesting the biblical texts makes many references to the mind of the beast, and Mark of beast being on the forehead, where behaviour is known in science to have jurisdiction. . So Christian are also marked and sealed, on their frontal lobes or forehead also. God as far back as Deuteronomy said write His Word on door posts of house, the "frontals" of our foreheads, and in our mouths. The "frontal" lobes!! Ephesians 4:30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 1 Corinthians 2:16 For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he will instruct Him? But we have the mind of Christ. Job 9:7 Who commands the sun not to shine, And sets a seal upon the stars; Ephesians 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Everyone who names the name of the Lord is to abstain from wickedness.” The secular video below discusses frontal lobes and I find it interesting that it is the final highest development in evolution, as well as in full maturity growth in the individual. Interesting! So insisted by atheists and evolution we are beasts and animals! And the bible is clear the mark of the beast is an image of a beast. Get the picture? Did God foretell science and evolution? Seems to have, are they seared Now the other interesting thing in Genesis 1 is before the animal and plant kingdom classifications existed, they were first discussed in Genesis 1. So Genesis gave a scientist an idea, and the scientist got credit, even though it took 1000's of years later to be aware. FYI all you science freaks, it's in Genesis 1! ARISTOTLE - 4th century BC (384 to322 BC) Greek philosopher divided organisms into 2 groups - plants and animals divided animals into blood and bloodless also divided animals into 3 groups according to how they moved - walking, flying, or swimming (land, air, or water) his system was used into the 1600's So shouldn't the Hebrew prophet be the father of clasifications in science in schools? So why isn't Genesis taught as establishing the 1st documented classifications of living things? Genesis 1 plant life 11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind . 21 God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; . 25 ... beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind. . 26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 29 Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food” In contrast, there is another image, so God let you all be beasts and animals evolved from animals to be advanced animal life. You fished what you wished! Romans 1 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
1
point
Does cancer mutate? And germs, bacteria, and viruses, do they mutate? Yes and yes (bacteria and viruses are types of germs). All replicating DNA mutates over time. the 6000th year The 6,000th year since what? The creation of the sun? As I said ealier, the stars were created in genesis just AFTER the sun, and light from distant stars has travelled billions of years to reach earth. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
I think the rock or whatever it was, may have occurred when Satan fell to the earth. Bright morning star fell like lighting Jesus said, What if that was the moment God began creation. Jesus does call him the god of this world. I think says there was nothing up there on day 4 he did it, I'm suggesting the earth may possibly be the oldest, and it sat alone black in space. And God made the hosts of heaven in Day 4. Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
I'm suggesting the earth may possibly be the oldest, and it sat alone black in space. Do you think fruit trees (created on day 3) grew in darkness? Do you think the earth stayed warm enough for liquid water with no sun? Do you think there is night and day (created on day 1) without an earth rotating and orbiting the sun? Side: I'll stick with evolution.
On Day , which was what I see likely as an evolutionary day. We saw in the Gospels that Satan was able to inhabit people and animals. The Bible makes distinct differences between the world and the believer. I'm inclined to think they made forms like the neanderthal, and mixed in with people made in God's image. Since 6000 years ago is when signs of intelligent life and societies can be found. So cave men to image of God. Whatever was growing out in the wold was wild and chaotic. That's why Genesis 2 says 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.Gen 1: 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, It sounds like God was describing what was going on during evolution. 2 images Man made in God's image and 1 made in the image of the god of this world. So your Father is God the Creator. Or your father was chaos, the god and father of this world, evolution, the currupted seed of Satan. Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
6000 years ago is when signs of intelligent life and societies can be found Lots of intelligence: Art, music, language, math, hunting, domestication, farming, tools, etc. etc. existed more than 6,000 years ago - it is just that around that time is when we started writing things down. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
Wait - how do you explain these quotes from YOU? "There are signs that mutation were likely, and there is evidence of old earth, that I accepted in my review of evidence." - ref "So while mutations may have occured, I actually don't doubt they did occur" - ref "Day 3 Growth of plant and bugs, and lower forms of cell mutations" - ref etc. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Atheist use "Magic Cheese" has no logical equal merit of argument to any of the points I made. It's an empty illogical argument because it's an unequal comparison. They compare pop rocks to a nutritious protein and vitamin rich complete meal. This is a perfect example of the illogical atheist. They tend to compare unicorns and spaghetti to the intricacy of brain surgery. When we go to trial, we include every source of evidence all prespectives, not just from sources that support a pre-determined conclusion. Its illogical to have an investigation and trial without an independent fair objective investigation of all evidence, while applying a fair measure of weight on each piece of evidedence is a mistrial. The determination of conclusion is “beyond a reasonable doubt.” So even if evolution is a factor, there is no proof there is not an intelligent designer, and the burden of proof is not on proving God, it's on disproving. Because evidence of faith ways heavier than evolution, because it's broad based over many studies, but evolution is limited to one area of one study, and is not conclusive of design by independent natural selection. And actually its not logical to develop a natural order outlined as we see when broken down orderly in such broad diversity in kind and species etc. After all, there are life forms that defecate from their mouths, or that marked themselves with bright colors indicating poisonous to their prey and enemies. Why would an evolving species Mark themselves to warn others? It's not logical! Like the atheist is not logical! And other facts spread out and stacked up within other studies are logical inferances. Like if it looks like a cat, and meows and purrs like a cat, and has behaviors like a cat then it must be a cat, and in the cat family. That's weighting evidence, the cat doesn't have a big sign on its head stating cat, but evidence shows its a cat. In the same way, the multidimensional evidence, also should be weighted, catergarized, and placed on a scale within the reasonable and logical mind for a “Beyond Reasonable Doubt” conclusion, as atheist have done with the exclusively limited evidence, that is not enirely complete, and also not in equal measure to all the other evidence stacked up from the many other factual fields of study, such as basic reading application in context and basic logical ability of contextual inferences and connections, and defining in context and simple text dissection for even the most basic even natural interpretations. And also through studies of archaeology, and history, and even math - as in probability of historic accounts occuring in sequence of order of events, their outcomes, and the probability of the fulfillments of all the many prophesies that have been fulfilled. And not only by random natural selection as in evolution, but a purposeful design, with a directive of intent, then when stacked up one on another its more advanced and more complicated then the intellectual arguments soley based on evolution. As we see in biblical text, as a complete work by one author, and in layers of times, generations, and events, to fulfill one prophesy leading to another as if building a sky scraper, and foretold and in pre-written detail of event and order of sequences leading to events, there is an immeasurable depth of fulfilment against all odds and probability. Which is more complicated than building a human from mutations, since there are more complicated moving parts to move kings president and nations than growing mutations of viruses and bacteria in a petri dish. But the intellectual atheist is so foolishly ignorant that they call pop rocks a complete understanding equal to a masters degree in nutrition! The purposeful prewriitten documentation of many events that occurred throughout history, and are still now occurring in fulfillments is actually overwhelming evidence! With a visual observance of eyewitness account, and in ancient history found i sequence of order with signs confirming thes unlikely and unusual events as shown in the documentary “Patterns of Evidence” Unlike evolution, is documentable and visible even to the natural mind through history seen by our eyes through written accounts of observance and the already past fulfillments in detail as pre-foretold. Yet the illogical atheists ignores it, because the challenges are logical, and they are not. And the illogical stumped atheist will pull out an item unanswered, by doing so claim it is logic to weigh a piece of sand as heavier than a large bag of cement. So I'd say they are the least logical of all thoughts regarding any use of logical, reasoning, indirect, aptitude, or any education resources. Then the argument comes down to flinging spitting and stomping emty arguments of illogical points, similar to children saying “but everyone else does it.” That is not usually a good argument to reason a decission for also doing an activity, except in the childs own unreasonable, underdeveloped, imature minds of children, and the minds that are just like them, children peers. Now just on the 1st page of the biblical text, when using basic reading skills and logical inferences, the biblical faitj accont of creation does not necessarily contradict evolution theory. Then in addition to, and when connected while using basic brain functions of even a 5th grader, when combined with all other evidence of considerable measure, studies carry weight in stacked up immeasurable support that is conclusive more of God than “no God.” Example of basic reading comprehension and logical inference made in the biblical account found in Genesis 1: Biblical account has growth of plants without photosynthesis on Day 3, but an ancient writer who lived by the natural understanding of the sun and seasons governing planting and harvesting food for everyday life, would not with a little common sense application have put this order of sequence. So the illogical atheist ignors reasoning and logic at the cost of true intelligence and intellect, and rathet argues like the nonsense of foolis children, who's arguments are more important than reasoning! By disability of basic common sense the negate advance of intellect, by a handicap unable to apply reasoning skills as found even in the most basic of reading comprehension and logical inferences! After all the evidence is looked at, we all make a jury decision. Till then your conclusions are mis-trials! A disabilitu of reason and camparitive relationships of likeness of measure. Like comparing a trip to the grocery store to a trip to Mexico, now that is an equal comparison to sum up the logic of the athiest! As they ignore all the evidence given without an independent, self observing, objective review. Do you weigh evidence as it is offered to you, in order to confirm or deny weight of credible reasonable admissabe evidence?
Did you determine for yourself if God exists or not “beyond a reasonable doubt,” by weighing presented evidence outside of the incomplete study of one precept of one field of academia? Is the unintelligent narrow minds that lead thought in evolution your prophets, and is the god of unintelligent dark, empty and void of form,evoution darkened your mind to everything else? Unbelievers display the wisdom of the world, and in any degree of observance, display the thoughts of fools. Unintelligible like empty cartons, sitting in the dark, storm clouds without rain, mutations of academia without form, born out of currupted seed growing “and it was so” or and it is what it is, in the garden of the world. In chaos and disorder like viruses grow in a petri dish, and like the non-vasular plants that grew and spread out that God said to be “and it was so” but called His growth “and saw it was good” If evidence is excluded is without objective reviews, you don't have a true conclusive argument “beyond reasonable doubt,” all you have is a mistrial! And that's fine, but then it's not educational, intellectual, or factual, and it's without authority of Confirmation, or even Determination. It's nothing more than a mythological belief in Scorpio the god of Neptune! So let's not call atheism logical because that's just factually ridiculous!! Awesome must watch Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
Now just on the 1st page of the biblical text, when using basic reading skills and logical inferences, the biblical faitj accont of creation does not necessarily contradict evolution theory. Biblical creation says birds came before land animals, the fossil record says otherwise. Biblical creation also says that land, sea, and air kinds are distinct rather than some sea kinds evolved to land animals, and some of those land animals evolved into birds (and some of those land animals evolved into sea animals - the marine mammals). Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Until tomorrow when they find another. ...................................... Have they dug up all earth? And Day 5 and Day 6 were 24 hour Days! I believe 5 and 6 are 24 hour Days. So far from what Ive seen in scriotures, even though there were mutations of the shape shifter on days 3 and 4. Day 5 and 6 were days of creation of order. 6000 years ago was creation of creatures of order. I believe God used the dirt out side the Garden and made clean animals in the garden. And other animals outside the Garden. Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
Until tomorrow when they find another. Until they find another what? A fossil of a bird that came before all land animals - that is what we want you to show us - that would be evidence against our current belief in evolution, but there isn't - and that is evidence that evolution is correct. I believe 5 and 6 are 24 hour Days. Which is what I believed you to be saying earlier - that 6,000 years is from the time of the creation of the sun. While I find that tragically lacking in intelligence, I still offered its refutation - the bible says the stars were created after the sun - and distant starlight shows the stars to be > billions of years old. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
The order is as it is, science will catch up I'm sure. This is the reasonable mind of common sense. If someone gives me complete detailed information, like 20 detailed indisputable information, and all 20 were 100 % correct, and the next day they gave me 5 more support pieces, and I confirmed the 20, and every one of them is correct, would the next 5 be less likely true? Or would I likely consider the next 5 would also more likely be true? If The Bible has layers of prophesy that came true, and has been 100 % confirmed by all accounts of my investigation up to this point, would I expect the rest to be true or untrue? . If your wife always tells you were she went, and you never had a reason to suspect otherwise, would you be following her to see if she decided to lie today? There is so much stacked up 100 % accurate detailed truth that is credible and reliable, I feel like I have files cabinet of evidence. So why would I expect anything less? . Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
And this just happened, on its own. And there is nothing else but an incubation of mutation in the midst of a changing ingredients a dog eat dog process of lower cell mutations to our world today, where one species has conscience to creativity to advancements of intelligence? Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
Looking at Bible Prophesy Daniel predicted the four great kingdoms!! Bible prophecy: Daniel 2:32-33 Prophecy written: About 530 BC Prophecy fulfilled: Throughout history In Daniel 2:32-33, there is a prophetic passage that symbolically identified the four great kingdoms that would rise up and control much of world, beginning in Daniel's lifetime. The passage uses symbolic imagery: 1. The head of gold, as Daniel explained, refers to the Babylonian Empire that ruled much of the world about 2600 years ago. 2. Daniel said that the head-of-gold empire would be followed by an empire symbolized by arms of silver. Christian scholars have often interpreted this to refer to the Medo-Persian Empire which later conquered the Babylonian Empire. The scholars say that the two arms refer to the two groups - the Medes and the Persians - who comprised the Medo-Persian Empire. 3. The third kingdom was symbolized by the statue's belly and thighs of brass. Some scholars believe that this is a reference to the Grecian Empire, which conquered the Medo-Persian Empire. The symbol of a belly and thighs of brass suggests that the kingdom was to start out as a united empire but end up as a divided empire. Under the leadership of Alexander the Great, the Grecian Empire was a united empire. But after Alexander's death, the empire was divided up. 4. The fourth symbol - that of iron legs and feet that were part iron and part clay - has often been suggested to be a reference to the Roman Empire, which later conquered the Grecian Empire. These four kingdoms ruled over much of the world, and each of the four ruled over the land of Israel during times in which a significant number of Jews - and perhaps a majority of Jews - were living in their homeland. Before the collapse of the Roman Empire, Jerusalem was destroyed and hundreds of thousands of Jews were forced into exile. Even today, a majority of Jews live outside of Israel. Daniel 2:32-33 (NIV): 32 The head of the statue was made of pure gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of baked clay.
Side: I have my own ideas.
The prophecy says that 4 great kingdoms will come around. It doesn't say anything about the kingdoms that could actually describe them. Different groups of people take over territories all the time, especially back then. Predicting that 4 random countries would come take over is vague. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
My take on immorality is Eternal Life. What is Light? Can it be in three time periods at the same time? Is there a place in the speed of light where time stands still? Is God known as Light? Does He give Eternal Life? Did anyone writing the Bible understand the speed of light, or was that a scientific realization of modern day? Then how or why would light and eternal life and Omnipresence meaning every where at once and Omniscience, knowing all things past present and future, why do you think light and these characteristics of the person who IS Light would somehow appear together, as characteristics found in God, who is The Light? Again did these ancient writers understand the science of Light? Side: I have my own ideas.
My questions and focuse on the debate of Evolution vs the Bible is not a text book argument. My question is when people decide there isn't a God, have they weighed evidence for themselves in other areas of study. I understand there may be some validity in Evolution, but I also understand that Evolution is not a science law, and not an absolute. And there is still a wide open door to apply God even in that study, if He indeed exists. Now if evidence is only weighed in support of No God, then what about the evidence that says there is? My point is weigh all, then decide for yourself after your position has been challenged by other findings as well. My point is let's be a fair jury unto our own verdict, and if you are NOT willing to be objective and weigh it, then your position is a mistrial because evidence has been selectively avoided and left out. So then how is your opinion have any merit? . Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
There's lots of great responses already in this column. I'll just add the problem with your analogy is religion's explanation for the computer is it came straight from God exactly the way it is now and there was never any versions before it. And then when scientists find remnants of a Commodore 64 or TRS-80 and make a theory they preceded your modern computer you deny it and refer back to the legends of Bronze Age civilization to counter. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
The gospels are eye witness accounts and actual biography. Most historians confirm this. The question for the skeptic really lies in the belief of Resurection and other miracles. But as a Biography, that isn't disputable by any reasonable argument. And there also has been forensic analysis done that would make the 4 gospels written collaborating the detailed stories impossible. If you take 2 executives, brainy people of modern day, and they set out a conspiracy, (without luxury of government coverups - as in Hillary) But just executives frauding people, and caught and under investigation, a series of questions would detail inconsistencies that are indications of lies in testimony. So just 2 people in short term with details of 1 thread of events would likely unravel. And that's not the case with the 4 gospels, a forensic would confirm it, many have. 1 in particular has, and he started as a passionate atheist, and after months of review determined these were true eyewitness accounts. Here is a quick clips from an atheist turned Christian through investigation. . Side: I have my own ideas.
The four eyewitness accounts - by people complicit in what was a banned or persecuted religion at the time, and whom all had decades to craft their texts and confer with each other. Hey, do you think 200 years from now Muslims will point to 4 texts written by Al Qaeda today and say clearly since they're all similar then what they said is confirmed fact? Side: I'll stick with evolution.
I think there is a difference in that 1 Persecution was prophesied, and so was the growth of Christianity. They were both prophesied by Jesus on several occasions, and both came true in tandem. 2 The 4 Gospels are detailed individually written accounts that do not show any discrepancies that would indicate collusion . by historians, and other investigative studies. 3 There are other documents confirm the texts. Some are hostile sources. But we can see the dynamics of the time period . Hostile Non-Biblical Pagan Accounts There are a number of ancient classical accounts of Jesus from pagan, non-Christian sources. These accounts are generally hostile to Christianity; some ancient authors denied the miraculous nature of Jesus and the events surrounding His life: . Thallus (52AD) Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who previously tried to explain away the darkness occurring at Jesus’ crucifixion: . “On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.” (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1) . If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we might find more confirmation of Jesus’ crucifixion. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, He was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of His crucifixion. . Tacitus (56-120AD) Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame: . “Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.” . In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ. . Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD) Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”: . “What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?…After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men…The wise king…Lived on in the teachings he enacted.” . From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus: He was a wise and influential man who died for His beliefs. The Jewish leadership was somehow responsible for Jesus’ death. Jesus’ followers adopted His beliefs and lived their lives accordingly. . Phlegon (80-140AD) In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it: . “Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth to the ninth hour.” (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1) Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria): “Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 14) . “And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place … ” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 33) . “Jesus, while alive, was of no assistance to himself, but that he arose after death, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and showed how his hands had been pierced by nails.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book 2, Chapter 59) . From these accounts, we can add something to our understanding: Jesus had the ability to accurately predict the future, was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and demonstrated His wounds after he was resurrected. . Pliny the Younger (61-113AD) Early Christians were also described in early, non-Christian history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians: . “They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.” . This early description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers met regularly to worship Jesus. . Suetonius (69-140AD) Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD): . “Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome).” (Life of Claudius, 25:4) . This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result: . “Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief.” (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2) . There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this account, we know Jesus had an immediate impact on His followers: They were committed to their belief Jesus was God and withstood the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on His followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true. . Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.) Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters: . “The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account….You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13) . From this account we can add to our description of Jesus: He taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus’ followers and exhibited to the world around them. . Celsus (175AD) This is the last hostile, non-Christian account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century: . “Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.” . Celsus admits Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea Jesus was the illegitimate son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm several important claims: Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God. . Hostile Non-Biblical Jewish Accounts In addition to classical pagan sources chronicling the life of Jesus and His followers, there are also a number of ancient hostile Jewish sources describing Jesus. These are written by Jewish theologians, historians and leaders who were definitely not sympathetic to the Christian cause. Their writings are often very harsh, critical and even demeaning to Jesus. But there is still much these writings confirm: . Josephus (37-101AD) In more detail than any other non-biblical historian, Josephus writes about Jesus in his “the Antiquities of the Jews” in 93AD. Josephus was born just four years after the crucifixion. He was a consultant for Jewish rabbis at an early age, became a Galilean military commander by the age of sixteen, and he was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Under the rule of Roman emperor Vespasian, Josephus was allowed to write a history of the Jews. This history includes three passages about Christians, one in which he describes the death of John the Baptist, one in which he mentions the execution of James (and describes him as the brother of Jesus the Christ), and a final passage which describes Jesus as a wise man and the messiah. There is much legitimate controversy about the writing of Josephus, because the first discoveries of his writings are late enough to have been re-written by Christians who were accused of making additions to the text. So to be fair, we’ll examine a scholarly reconstruction stripped of Christian embellishment: . “Now around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, (but) those who had first loved him did not cease (doing so). To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared” (This neutral reconstruction follows closely the one proposed by John Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus: The Roots of the Problem and the Person). . Now there are many other ancient versions of Josephus’ writing which are even more explicit about the nature of Jesus’ miracles, life and his status as the Christ, but let’s take this conservative version and see what we can learn. From this text, we can conclude: Jesus lived in Palestine, was a wise man and a teacher, worked amazing deeds, was accused by the Jews, crucified under Pilate and had followers called Christians. . Jewish Talmud (400-700AD) While the earliest Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis appear in the 5th century, the tradition of these Rabbinic authors indicates they are faithfully transmitting teachings from the early “Tannaitic” period of the 1st Century BC to the 2nd Century AD. Scholars believe there are a number of Talmudic writings referring to Jesus, and many of these writings are said to use code words to describe Jesus (such as “Balaam” or “Ben Stada” or “a certain one”). But for our purposes we’ll be very conservative and limit our examination to the passages referring to Jesus in a more direct way: . “Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b) . “Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, ‘What is that which is written, ‘No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house’? (Psalm 91:10)… ‘No evil will befall you’ (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; ‘nor shall any plague come near your house’ (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth.” (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b) . “Our rabbis have taught that Jesus had five disciples: Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. They brought Matthai to (to trial). He said, ‘Must Matthai be killed? For it is written, ‘When (mathai) shall I come and appear before God?’” (Psalm 92:2) They said to him, “Yes Matthai must be killed, for it is written, ‘When (mathai) he dies his name will perish’” (Psalm 41:5). They brought Nakai. He said to them, “Must Nakai be killed? For it is written, “The innocent (naqi) and the righteous will not slay’” (Exodus 23:7). They said to him, “Yes, Nakai must be kille, for it is written, ‘In secret places he slays the innocent (naqi)’” (Psalm 10:8). (b. Sanhedrin 43a; the passage continues in a similar way for Nezer, Buni and Todah) . And this, perhaps the most famous of Talmudic passages about Jesus: . “It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover. (b. Sanhedrin 43a) . From just these passages mentioning Jesus by name, we can conclude the following: Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, had disciples who were martyred for their faith (one of whom was named Matthai), and was executed on the day before the Passover. . The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD) The Toledot Yeshu is a medieval Jewish retelling of the life of Jesus. It is completely anti-Christian, to be sure. There are many versions of these ‘retellings’, and as part of the transmitted oral and written tradition of the Jews, we can presume their original place in antiquity, dating back to the time of Jesus’ first appearance as an influential leader who was drawing Jews away from their faith in the Law. The Toledot Yeshu contains a determined effort to explain away the miracles of Jesus and to deny the virgin birth. In some places, the text is quite vicious, but it does confirm many elements of the New Testament writings. Let’s take a look at a portion of the text (Jesus is called ‘Yehoshua’): . Above taken from : http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/ . Side: I have my own ideas.
Old Testament updates to Archaeology should be looked at also for true weighing of available evidence. See documentary Patterns of Evidence for contradict evidence showing accuracy of Exodus Biblical account. I believe it is currently on Netflix
Side: I have my own ideas.
We are expected to believe that a super computer evolved, with Linux installed and a number of aps? That's Quite a lot to happen all by itself. No, the Theory of Evolution asks us to believe no such thing. In fact, it requests we believe in nothing remotely close to that absurd analogy. Your metaphor is as silly as that old one the Creationists used to prattle on about that said Evolution was as likely as a tornado in a junkyard swirling up a bunch of discarded items and then setting down a completely, perfectly-fabricated 747 jumbo jet. Evolution works nothing like those two scenarios. It does not ask that we believe we, or the Earth began with anything that was already perfected and formed. Rather, Evolution postulates a very long, mostly gradual process of trial and error. Of the painstakingly slow, but also highly efficient process of Selective Inheritance. That is, of species utilizing desirable or favorable genetic mutations to enable them to thrive and adapt successfully in their given environments. And then to pass these physical advantageous traits onto their offspring. Over and over until an ascension is developed and what was once a desirable aberration finally becomes the new standard. It's a far different mechanization, or process than what you and your supercomputer in the sand poses. As that is nothing but an unexplained and sudden action. One with no explained previous process of enabling it to attain fruition. So once again, we here see a detractor of Evolution simply showing is that they do not understand the theory they are wrongfully attempting to denigrate. This gets very tiresome, I must confess. And it is the standard, rather than the rare, for people who disbelieve Evolution. That is, not to put too fine a point on it: they just don't know what they are talking about. SS Side: I'll stick with evolution.
|
1
point
Maybe the universe is filled with disembodied, imortal, sentient, beings. Then one of them came up with a patent to build an inhabitable body. And so they started building all life and posessed their creations. I mean, I too can come up with some crazy ass shit theory ;) Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
i can appreciate the absurdity of evolution from another perspective, however your analogy is missing a crucial component which could be fixed with something like a mutation script. applications that do not properly or competitively meet their purpose are deleted and so linux runs these applications with minute changes and iterates. every iteration is reviewed for its relative success and the change is assimilated into the application if it makes the app more successful for its purpose. evolution is just a theory, but as with other theories is a constructed guess upon facts and backed by evidence. arguably the ideas some come up with to explain these facts are just as ridiculous and false as the next. but as of yet, evolution has no contender to better explain our origin with the current information. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
1
point
not your original question, but no, evolution does not really explain the beginning of life, but explains how one form of life can slowly become something unrecognisable to the original. then you just need a starting point. there are a few (scientific) theories, but i'll stick with chemical evolution here. as you sort of said, chemical reactions come together to form life. this has been demonstrated in a lab where molecules under a simulated lightning form amino acids: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ admittedly there is a gap here, while amino acids are considered the building blocks of life, there is no known chemical method or process that would make these building blocks become a self-replicating organism. i honestly can't say anything other than they randomly happened to form together in a functional and cooperative manner in reference to a living organism. this is the same explanation we started with, that chemical reactions randomly made life, but is less of a stretch considering life's foundational components exist naturally. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
The question I have is related to survival vs cooperation. I'm not a scientific person, .but if the earth was evolving mutating adapting to further evolve and mutate etc ... the wouldn't selective mutations obey their genes for survival, reproduction, and dominance? And by doing so limit or eliminate exclusively for its own survival and progress? Now, we can't really expect high thought, so we can't apply our thought process to the process, just basic cell reproduction, and there can be that smart gene, that remembers an experience to assist in progress. But animals don't protect the survival of their prey, they just obey hunger. So in this rapidly multiplying field of evolving life forms, who defined the boundaries so the weaker life forms could survive and progress at an even rate to result in the full appreciation of all of nature, seemingly all at once? Side: I have my own ideas.
I'm not entirely sure what you are asking, so I'll just respond to your main points. the wouldn't selective mutations obey their genes for survival, reproduction, and dominance? Well, the genes are what is being changed by the mutations. Also, dominance is not necessary. But the ability to survive long enough to reproduce is essential, yes. And by doing so limit or eliminate exclusively for its own survival and progress? Kind of? I'm not sure what you are asking, but if an individual can not survive long enough to reproduce, its DNA will not be propagated. That is the essence of natural selection, which itself is the essence of the Theory of Evolution. But animals don't protect the survival of their prey, they just obey hunger. Of course. I'm again uncertain about the point you are trying to make. So in this rapidly multiplying field of evolving life forms, who defined the boundaries so the weaker life forms could survive and progress at an even rate to result in the full appreciation of all of nature, seemingly all at once? Define weaker life forms. If they are still around, they are successful. There is no real boundary anywhere in the global ecosystem. And the life forms we have did not appear "seemingly at once" at all. ALL evidence shows them appearing at different points in time. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Isn't dominance a selective process in mutations? Aren't cancer cells that Grow, doing so by selective replacement of the dominating mutation? As mutations dominate the field of available resourses used to excell independent mutations, isn't there a conflict of growth, survival, and reproduction with competing mutations? Cancelling out progress of the weakest mutations? How then did the variety thrive in survival with some being super mutations and others being small in value. As they mutate to substance that is consumable, wouldn't they become prey, and then cancel out their progress thus far? So then at that rate, what was developed to be prey during the growths and mutations, for peroiods long enough to become plenty for all to eat and survive, as the mutations continue to thrive? And I think it's even more of a question than the popular question - "where did Cain get his wife?" As cells reproduce and mutate, what probability exists that the same species of mutations are completing their mutations at the same rate, to then fully evolve as 1 male and 1 female of the same species, for then the continued multiplying of that species? Especially when other mutations would be Ready to consume the mutations as they are developing? Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Again, the way you are using terms is confusing and it is difficult to answer you since I'm not sure what you are asking. However, I do understand that you are not a science person and respect that you are showing curiosity, so I will do my best. Isn't dominance a selective process in mutations? Dominance of what? At its heart, natural selection means that if you don't live long enough to survive, you don't propagate your DNA, and if enough of your species can't do it, you go extinct and play no role in further evolution. If your survival involves dominating something, then so be it. But any local environment is complex, so likely, you wouldn't be dominating any more of it than you need to survive. And there is no guarantee that you could "dominate" any other environment that you might wander into. As mutations dominate the field of available resourses used to excell independent mutations, isn't there a conflict of growth, survival, and reproduction with competing mutations? I'm not sure if I'm parsing this correctly, but...I think by "mutations", you are referring to populations of specific species. I will use the words "populations" or "species" from now on. A population may or may not dominate the resources that it needs, but not all populations require the same resources. And when they do, it is possible to establish an equilibrium where both populations can use the same resources without major problem. In fact, it often occurs that each species limits the growth of the other, which tends to be best for the overall local ecosystem. But mostly, different species have vastly different requirements, so they can coexist without any problem. Cancelling out progress of the weakest mutations? If a species is surviving just fine, I don't think it makes sense to call it weak. Its as strong as it needs to be at that point. If it is "weak" it will likely go extinct, which has happened to 99% of all life forms. How then did the variety thrive in survival with some being super mutations and others being small in value. It isn't about numeric value. It is simply a yes or no question. Can it survive in that place at that time? If yes it goes on and usually slowly evolves to make survival even easier. If no, they go extinct. As they mutate to substance that is consumable, wouldn't they become prey, and then cancel out their progress thus far? Being prey doesn't mean they die off. Let's say you have a predator who only eats one form of prey. If they killed all of the prey species, the predators would be dead very soon. But both predator and prey are simultaneously evolving and getting more in tune with all aspects of their environment. Predators never eat just one form of prey, and prey has multiple ways of protecting their population. As cells reproduce and mutate, what probability exists that the same species of mutations are completing their mutations at the same rate, to then fully evolve as 1 male and 1 female of the same species, for then the continued multiplying of that species? Sexual reproductions only had to evolve once. Ever since then it has been passed from one species to the next. No mutation needed anymore. As far as how sexual reproduction may have developed: http://www.the-scientist.com/ Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Sounds like an awefully lot of guesswork on the how, and the overall environment of growth. I understand how there has been found portions of the smallest building blocks of complex cells. But since God had plant growth populating and seeding, growing in cell rich environments filling the dirt with bacteria and viruses and even bugs, etc. Then God made crearures from the dirt of the ground, then God made man from the dirt of the ground. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
It isn't guesswork so much as life is extremely complicated. Every life form has at least the potential to somehow affect every other life form in the local environment. So does the chemistry of the soil, and the lay of the land. And the local climate and change of seasons. And the changing supply of water. And now, human activities, which can affect an ecosystem on the other side of the planet. With all of these variables, every "guess" has numerous hoops it has to jump through to be valid. And the more we know, the more complicated it gets. All evidence shows that single-celled organisms similar to bacteria (which the Bible never mentions) were first. Then came the earliest autotrophs (the ancestors of plants), and their interaction with the environment made multicellular organisms possible. And keep in mind, this was all in the ocean. Earth is 4.6 billion years ago, but life didn't appear on land until around 530 million years ago. There is evidence that animals (almost certainly the predecessors to amphibians actual got on land before plants did. Modern humans appeared less than 500 thousand years ago. Basically everything concerning God's creation in life is incompatible with the evidence we have. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Why would the Bible mention bacteria? I understand how there has been found portions of the smallest building blocks of complex cells such as bacteria God had plant growth populating and seeding, growing in cell rich environments filling the dirt with bacteria and viruses and even bugs, etc. All growing on the 3rd day. Then God made creatures from the dirt of the ground. Then God made man from the dirt of the ground. My conclusion is there is a logical intrusion of the Creator, God is factual.. It's more logical that everything was formed out of the dirt from the ground, filled with life and cells. And day 5 and 6 arived in a day hand appeared within 1 day Everything jumped into being, although I do believe there were many things growing including cells and amoeba and viruses and bacteria, and even as advanced as bugs etc Day 5 says He made fish and birds Day 6 says He made animals and man And He did so from the ground which already was growing all these things So when God picked up a handful of dirt to form everything, He picked up dirt that was rich in those things you know as Evolution! Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Why would the Bible mention bacteria? Because they are by far the most numerous and successful forms of life on the planet. Because they are everywhere we go. Because they can kill us with ease. Because simple precautions concerning cleanliness and food preparation could have saved millions of lives, if not billions. I'd say that is a huge oversight. Then God made creatures from the dirt of the ground. Then God made man from the dirt of the ground. Only in the first origin account. In the second version, man came first. The thing is, I do not believe the Bible is factual. Very little of it can be supported by observable reality. Meanwhile, vast amounts data support and reaffirm evolution. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
There are not two separate accounts of Creation. The Bible in a few places has detailed an event, then expands the story filling in specific details in the next chapter(s) In Genesis 1 it details Creation itself In chapter 2 it specifically focuses on the Garden So when it says He made man and then went and planted a Garden, and placed man into it; shows that God made Adam from the ground outside of the Garden. It's not discussing the event of Day 3 in chapter 2. It's speaking of a specific location and a Garden planted by God for man to cultivate. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Genesis 1 DAY 1 - LIGHT 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. DAY 2 - EXPANSE 6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. 8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. DAY 3 -PLANT GROWTH 9 Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10 God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. 11 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. 13 There was evening and there was morning, a third day. DAY 4 - TIME AND SEASONS 14 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16 God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17 God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19 There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. DAY 5 - BIRDS AND FISH 20 Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.” 21 God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23 There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. DAY 6 CREATURES AND MAN 24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. 25 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28 God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 29 Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30 and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so. 31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Right. So man was created after the other creatures. However, in Genesis 2:18-2:20: "18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him." Man was created before the other creatures. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
This is making it in story form, likely because of prophetic words or instructions within it. Everything in the Bible is on purpose. God made Creatures then made man, who knows maybe He made more that day. At that point they were in the Garden. Oh bingo! He probably made goats and lambs and other known clean animals. The Garden was exclusive so that actually makes sense. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
Biblical awareness of science? No problem with the term day and night. It makes sense and is documentable. If all my other evidence leads to Divine Creation, Intervention, and Inspiration than the text would be the account. And that says Let there be Light on day one without sun, and then in Revelations we again have a kingdom without need of the sun. So if both are compatible, then the account in Genesis 1 is also compatible, since non vascular plants grow out instead of up. The a naturalist writer 1000s of years before the possibly more potential for a more "creative" account we find in Revelations. One in Genesis is not giving an account of a spiritual kingdom with a fantastic Resurection illuminating a kingdom, the guy in Genesis was just accounting how nature began, but the account goes against his experience. I conclude, it's not reasonable or logical to consider the text from his prespective of experience, nor is it reasonable to think the writer would have documented against his natural experience, especially when science unrelated to creation would confirm the accuracy of the naturalists account of Days three and four. Reason being, we have a written record that details things a man in that time period would not have thought to write. It goes against what a natural person living in a natural world by natural elements would record as factual according to what he knows about the world around home. So stepping back from the 24 hour day, which I think is substantiated in Genesis 1, since time and the appearance of the sun into the earth being the 1st full day as a 24 hour day was Day Five. Theology aside God could have put all those things in the ground in a day. He could have spread it out over billions of years in preperation for the term of life that he ordained for this world. Which also makes sense since after an exact time frame of 6000 years, the earth seems to be vomiting man and creature, and the account of 6 days being a typology of term as well as an account of creation, a few scriptures say "to God one day is as 1000 years and 1000 years as one day," time governs man, but clearly says biblical time is defined from the 24 hour day that governs man, to 1000 years as a day, to Eternity as a day. Another scripture discusses measurement and clearly says by man's measurement not heavenly measurement, so again we see some weird knowledge infused into the Bible, that science seems to have learned thousands of years of an ancient writer who would have no basis for that input. We can argue coincidence of creativity creating other gods, like as in Egypt. But, how many unobservable to the natural thinking mind without advancements do other religion ancient views of gods have intermingled phrases in their descriptions that have a scientific factual basis, presented in ancient verbiage and terms, because the Bible has many of these. And its unusual, and fantastic, and with reasoning and logic, the evidence seems more in support of Divine Inspiration that a naturalist writing a text from his own prespective. Side: I have my own ideas.
1
point
Evolution, as you demonstrated, leaves alot to the imagination as well. The assumption is because a living things bear similar parts, so therefore living things evolved in different directions assimilating other building blocks of life forms. But the assembling and other details are imaginations seemingly educated guesses because parts are similar or appear advanced by combining several to make another life form. There is more evidence for Divine Intruder hands down in every area of life and our world. If you only try to define God through something meant to disprove Him, and your not open to true investigation and answer the unanswerable, without even an imaginative theory, then how can you declare Affirmatively the denial of His existence? Based on what? My question, as I read Genesis 1, why would it make sense for the author to place day 3 before day 4? It wouldn't be a thought process of their day, there wouldn't be any reason at all for this order. They lived life by the rising and setting of the sun, their every harvest depended on Seasons and the sun. So why would the ancient writer place Day 3 as a day of growth? You have a picture of evolution as in the basic findings occurring independently left to prepare the earth for life. This is the day plant growth and organism, and the basic economic system was being established. The earth was being enriched on Day 3, and it was before the 24 hour day. The 1st FULL 24 hour day was on Day 5. And Days 5 and 6 could have been 24 hours or 1000 Years. Because in other scriptures it is said 1 Day is as 1000 Years and 1000 years is as 1 Day. So when God made man and beast from the ground, He used ground that had been enriched likely for millions of years prepping the earth to sustain our lives for the next 6000 years. The curious scripture when you think in these terms, God gave a command for the Earth to be given a Sabbath Day, a Day of Rest. And it also says 1 Day is as 1000 years. Then end time prophesies detail earth related cataclysmic natural events. Doesn't Earth seem to have come to a place in time that it needs a rest from Man? . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Evolution, as you demonstrated, leaves alot to the imagination as well. Nope. We already covered this. The Theory of Evolution has more evidence than anyone can count. For a new aspect of the theory to be brought in, it must comport with all of the others. If an older element cannot comport with new evidence, it is disregarded. So imagination is not relied on. It is a matter of completing an extremely complicated puzzle. Also, Christianity sure leaves a lot to the imagination as well, particularly concerning God. Exactly what process did he use to convert dirt into life? Why use a flood to punish mankind when he had a million of cleaner tools at his disposal? Why did he give us the ability to reason, when doing so will push many away from his word? etc. There is more evidence for Divine Intruder hands down in every area of life and our world. Not in ANY process we have ever investigated. Never. If you only try to define God through something meant to disprove Him, and your not open to true investigation and answer the unanswerable, without even an imaginative theory, then how can you declare Affirmatively the denial of His existence? If you only try to define God through something meant to prove Him, and you're not open to true investigation and answer the unanswerable, with nothing more than an imaginative story written by superstitious bronze age folks, then how can you declare Affirmatively that he eixists? Because in other scriptures it is said 1 Day is as 1000 Years and 1000 years is as 1 Day. Which is meaningless and simply makes it harder to trust the veracity of the book. Then end time prophesies detail earth related cataclysmic natural events. Doesn't Earth seem to have come to a place in time that it needs a rest from Man? There are always cataclysmic natural events. Nothing anywhere near what this planet has gone through in the past. If Yellowstone blows, THEN we have a problem, although we have survived it before. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
When we go to trial, we include every source of evidence all prespective, not just from sources that support a pre determinef conclusion. Investigation and trial without an independent fair objective investigation is a mistrial. The determination is beyond a reasonable doubt. After all the evidence is looked at, we all make a jury decision. And it is applied to what we conclude. After all the evidence is given an objective review, do we find God Exists beyond a reasonable doubt, or that He doesn't exist beyond a reasonable doubt. If evidence is excluded from objective reviw, you don't have a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt, all you have is a mistrial! . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
When we go to trial, we include every source of evidence all prespective, not just from sources that support a pre determinef conclusion. Investigation and trial without an independent fair objective investigation is a mistrial. Which is precisely why the Bible would never stand up in trial. What you are accusing me of, is exactly what you are doing. There are hundreds of peer-reviewed published studies supporting evolution published every year. There have been countless such papers over the course of several hundred years. We have made predictions based on evolutionary theory that have proven correct countless times. We have used evolutionary theory to revolutionize medicine. We have SEEN evolution occur right before our very eyes, more times than we should expect to. This is all objective investigation performed by people all around the world, including MANY who were personally opposed to evolution, yet were forced to accept the evidence. After all the evidence is looked at, we all make a jury decision. I do not believe for one second that you have looked at all of the evidence for evolution. After all the evidence is given an objective review, do we find God Exists beyond a reasonable doubt, or that He doesn't exist beyond a reasonable doubt. Neither. There is no confirmed evidence for God, which suggests the default position of there being no God is more likely to be true. If evidence is excluded from objective reviw, you don't have a conclusion beyond reasonable doubt, all you have is a mistrial! Which is why your complaints lead to a mistrial here. Also, amusingly, its worth pointing out that creationism has actually been shot down in actual trials while evolution has been supported in actual trials. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
I guess it depends where you decide to glean your information. No, it depends how you obtain your information, and how you test it. Just taking the word of a very old book that was written by numerous people who were superstitious and bigoted, AND has numerous inaccuracies is not being rational, wise or objective. Actually observing nature and recording those observations and measurements and constantly learning more about the world is where truth comes from. If you seek those that twist things to agree with you, then you refuse evidence to the contrary, again a mistrial Correct. That is exactly what you are doing. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
I've been pretty strait forward with you. I haven't twisted what you say, or say you said something you didn't say . This is debate, right? We are discussing things to persuade that our views have merit to consider. With debate you either become more solid in your views, or be challenged to consider altering your views. It's fair to expect a reasonable discussion. I think I've been fair to you. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
You misunderstand me. I'm saying that the sources you use, the Bible and presumably various other Christians, have been forced to twist real world observations, or ignore them, to make any sense of the Bible. It is confirmation bias at its most obvious. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Evolution is an obvious example. Your vague attempts to reconcile the two conflicting origin accounts in Genesis. Your examples provided of "prophecies" which are extremely vague and could be interpreted in countless ways. The weak arguments Christians often use when inconsistencies within the Bible are pointed out. The fact that there are numerous different branches of Christianity that are interpreting the exact same words in various different ways. The fact that creationists on other Christians claim to respect science but disavow findings obtained by using the scientific method but cannot use the SM on their own claims. The fact that the Bible was "edited" at the council at Nicea. The explanation that responding to prayers is up to God, thus making it impossible to verify their effectiveness. The fact that when we claim there is no solid evidence for Christ, they point to writers who were born 50-200 years after the resurrection, and obviously never met him. I hope that's good enough for now. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Your funny I asked for an example of Bible Prophesy that has already completed to pass that is vague to you??? As far as the Resurection there is significant supportive evidence that makes that probable for the skeptic and our faith assured. Millions of people endured loss of everything or martyrdom for Jesus and the Resurection. Their adherence under extreme degrees of pressure non militants, holds weight and it is credible the evidence. And that growth out to the Gentiles and out to the Nations. You have to think for a minute, you have Prophets Side: I have my own ideas.
How are any of your examples of "fulfilled" prophecies not vague? You used the words/phrases "interpreted", "some scholars believe", and "been suggested to be" as support. But none of those kingdoms are intrinsically linked to those symbols or metals. And there were many kingdoms all over the world when those prophecies were written. Its pretty easy to cherry pick the four biggest ones and say "see, the prophecy was true", but without more clear and indisputible details it sounds just like the prophecies of people and religions all over the world. And according to them, their prophecies came true too. Its confirmation bias. Any psychologist will tell you. That's 95% of all religion and spirituality. Making up stories to make yourself comfortable with the world. As far as the Resurection there is supportive evidence that makes that probable for the skeptic and our faith. Such as? Millions of people endured loss of everything or martyrdom for Jesus and the Resurection. That is an evidence, that holds weight and I makes the evidence credible. By that logic, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism are all true too. Just because people were willing to sacrifice their lives for their beliefs does not mean their beliefs are correct. Your "evidence" can all be torn apart in seconds by any first year philosophy student. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Here is part of the historical event of Steven's Martyrdom Notice his stoner's coats were laid at Saul's feet. Then after murdering them, Saul personally experiences an encounter. Goes from killing them to the greatest winner of souls
Acts 7 51 “You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did. 52 Which one of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? They killed those who had previously announced the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become; 53 you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it.” 54 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the quick, and they began gnashing their teeth at him. 55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; 56 and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” 57 But they cried out with a loud voice, and covered their ears and rushed at him with one impulse. 58 When they had driven him out of the city, they began stoning him; and the witnesses laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!” 60 Then falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!” Having said this, he fell asleep. Side: I have my own ideas.
The Bible is valid as a historical document. We are not focusing our discussion on the supernatural in our debate, we are discussing history and accuracy in pre-written history. So please stick to facts Show me how the Bible isn't authentic to itself. You actually can't prove or disprove the supernatural aspects. So we are looking at the possibility of Divine knowledge through its history! And through its accuracy in prophetic writings known as pre-written history or foreknowledge. If there is Divine Inspiration, then the supernatural is credible, and reasonable and plausible, even likely and probable! Side: I have my own ideas.
The Bible is valid as a historical document. Not according to anyone who is not Christian, or to many Historians, even some who are Christian. We are not focusing our discussion on the supernatural in our debate, we are discussing history and accuracy in pre-written history. We are discussing the validity of the Bible are we not? If anything stated as fact in the Bible is wrong, then the whole Bible is suspect. Show me how the Bible isn't authentic to itself. You can't assert if something is correct by only referring to that something. This is incredibly basic logic. So we are looking at the possibility of Divine knowledge through its history! And through its accuracy in prophetic writings known as pre-written history or foreknowledge. Feel free to provide any prophecy you want. However these are the widely accepted criteria: It must be accurate. It must be in the Bible, but fulfilled outside of it. It must be unambiguous. It must be improbable. It must have been about events that could not be known by the authors. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
We are discussing the validity of the Bible are we not? If anything stated as fact in the Bible is wrong, then the whole Bible is suspect. Because you can't disprove Supernatural And because I can't prove Supernatural. We are establishing credibility or lack of credibility in historical content of the Bible, and it's Prophetic scriptures. Even that is supernatural really, but that supernatural intrusion can be proven or disproven as Prophesy or pre-written history, or as false. I'm not interested in the superficial passing contest that is usually the only outcome of debates I've seen. So we can discuss what we both can prove, then we can move on to say now if all these things are proven or disproven let's discuss the next level. The problem with many of the debates on this site are people don't build a foundation of argument, a base line to build on. So by the time we get to some other points there is some measure of case not just shooting a bebe gun at the first bird you see! Side: I have my own ideas.
Evolution is also like denominations!! But of course there are elements of the contemporary theory of evolution that are debated; that’s how science works. A good example of such debate is a prominent article in Nature in 2014 that asked, “Does Evolutionary Theory Need a Rethink?” A careful read of the article shows that none of the authors doubts that evolution has occurred; they simply disagree on how to weigh various complex mechanisms for evolutionary change over time. Think of such disagreements along the lines of the various denominations within Christianity: it is possible to disagree on and debate some of the finer points without calling into question the general framework. To understand a bit of this internal discussion, it will be helpful to categorize some of the evolutionary “denominations”. - See more at: http://biologos.org/common-questions/ Side: I have my own ideas.
There aren't "numerous divisions". There are a bunch of people all working together to find the truth a bout a very complex scenario where there is still much that isn't fully understood. There are people who have different hypothesis for now, but the idea is to work to get rid of the weakest ones and work with what remains. They aren't in different camps, and they won't continue to support their hypothesis if it gets proven wrong. They are also all working to reduce the necessity of interpretation. Christians, on the other hand, the all have the exact same book to work with. A book supposedly infallible, indirectly authored by God, who is supposed to be a God of Love. Yet, they sometimes have vast disagreements based on interpretation. On occasion, they have warred with each other. If God is perfect, this should never happen, unless he had nothing to do with its authorship. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
You have to realize my focus is on prophesy that has been fulfilled, if 2000 Prophesies have been fulfilled, then don't you think the other 500 will also likely be fulfilled? I understand future prophesy has many schools of thought. God doesn't reveal everything until His time to reveal it. And Jesus and Prophets and New Testament writers all said the last day would be full of deceptions, even from wolves in sheep's clothing, in other words people who look like sheep or the flock of the Shepherd. I know God and His Word well enough to realize, there is One Voice to listen for, and that is His. And if isn't opening up a revelation, it isn't earth shattering to me, because I understand prophesy and the Holy Spirit. He reveals what He wants us to know, when He wants us to know it. Now past fullfilled prophesy at times is a way for God to guide us with confirmations from His Word on how to interpret future prophesies, if it is time for them to be revealed. . Here are a few of many scriptures that show this - Daniel 12:4 But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase.” . Daniel 12:9 He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time. . Revelation 10:4 When the seven peals of thunder had spoken, I was about to write; and I heard a voice from heaven saying, “Seal up the things which the seven peals of thunder have spoken and do not write them.” Side: I have my own ideas.
Adding or interpreting scripture to comport with real world observations or rule out the many inconsistencies. Worse is when they attempt to twist observations to comport with scripture. Here is a list of Biblical claims that are impossible, extremely improbable or absurd. There is also a link to a list of biblical inconsistencies. http://infidels.org/library/modern/ Side: I'll stick with evolution.
The Web site you gave is not factual, it is opinion! Please provide facts against prophesy, showing they did not come true, why is this person's opinion worth toilet paper? Key to Abbreviations The author uses a two-letter system of abbreviations for the various books which make up the Bible. Although not unique, it is somewhat unusual. This is the key to those abbreviations. Fatal Bible Flaws? In the author's opinion, these particular verses are so inconsistent with each other and/or with reality as to be fatal to the claim that the Bible was inspired by a perfect and omnipotent "God." Bible Absurdities In the author's opinion, these verses represent absurdities which would not be characteristic of inspiration by a perfect and omnipotent "God." Bible Atrocities In the author's opinion, these verses represent atrocities which would not be characteristic of inspiration by a perfect, omnipotent, just, and loving "God." Bible Inconsistencies - Bible Contradictions In the author's opinion, these verses represent inconsistencies which would not be characteristic of inspiration by a perfect "God." Note: The author makes a subtle distinction between the terms "inconsistency" and "contradiction"; please see his explanation in the disclaimer at the top of this article, and keep in mind that at least some of the listed inconsistencies could certainly be considered biblical contradictions. Bible Precepts: Questionable Guidelines In the author's opinion, these verses represent precepts and/or guidelines which would not be characteristic of inspiration by a perfect "God," precepts and/or guidelines which are even sometimes downright ridiculous. Bible Vulgarities & Obscenities In the author's opinion, these verses could be taken as being sufficiently vulgar as to be unworthy of having been inspired by a perfect "God," verses which--were they not in the Bible--would likely be considered even by many Jews and Christians to be "vulgar." Side: I'll stick with evolution.
But its just your opinion that this is the writer's opinion. Most of those points were factual. Numerous things mentioned in the Bible are impossible. Also, you should use quotes and give credits when you are using somebody else's words. From this point on, I will not respond to plagiarism. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
https://www.christiancourier.com/ Prophetic Principles In this two-part study, we will survey some of the prophecies that focus upon Babylon’s demise. First, though, let us remind ourselves of several principles that govern the validity of genuine prophecy. True prophecies are stated emphatically; they are not couched in the jargon of contingency (unless, of course, contextual evidence suggests that one is dealing with a conditional prophecy). Generally, a significant time frame must lapse between the prophetic utterance and the fulfillment, so as to exclude the possibility of “educated speculation.” The prophecy will involve specific details, not vague generalities. The predictive declarations will be fulfilled precisely and completely. No mere substantial percentage will suffice. One must recognize, though, that occasionally a prophecy may contain figurative terminology; this does not, however, militate against its evidential validity. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Reasonable doubt- this is credible evidence It is not likely and is not usual - as a matter of fact it is HIGHLY unlikely and EXTREMELY unusual!! Here is part of the historical event of Steven's Martyrdom Notice his stoners coats were laid at Saul's feet. Saul after murdering Christiand, has an unusual transformation and personally experienced an encounter with the Risen Jesus. Saul goes from killing them to the greatest winner of souls. And by those actions fullfills PROPHESY!! And his dramatic conversion pushes the gospel out from his own countrymen to Gentiles, (other Nation other than Israel) and is well know even from those he was in league with while severely persecuting Christians. Matt 24 14“This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come. Isaiah 11 10 "And in that day there shall be a Root of Jesse, who shall stand as a banner to the people; for the Gentiles shall seek Him, and His resting place shall be glorious." . So like it, or not this IS reasonable evidence, and along with 2000 prophesies that have already been fulfilled in detail! With only 500 to go, and some of those are in process! Evidence FOR GOD is mounting!!! Stephen was martyred as murders placed their coats at Saul's feet. SAUL Later became PAUL, and went on to become a valiant Appostle of the faith he was a murderer in war against Christians! What changed? Acts 7 51 “You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did. 52 Which one of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? They killed those who had previously announced the coming of the Righteous One, whose betrayers and murderers you have now become; 53 you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it.” 54 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the quick, and they began gnashing their teeth at him. 55 But being full of the Holy Spirit, he gazed intently into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God; 56 and he said, “Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” 57 But they cried out with a loud voice, and covered their ears and rushed at him with one impulse. 58 When they had driven him out of the city, they began stoning him; and the witnesses laid aside their robes at the feet of a young man named Saul. 59 They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!” 60 Then falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!” Having said this, he fell asleep. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
So like it, or not this IS reasonable evidence, Not if it is using Biblical quotes to support a Biblical claim. Its like using a fictional book that introduces a character and later kills him, and claim that those events happened in real life without any outside evidence showing that this character really lived in died. I do not know why you can't understand this. Side: I have my own ideas.
http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ For the prophesy below to have come true, God would have had to have fulfilled 2 OTHER Bible Prophesies, 1 -to scatter them to all the Nations, and 2 - then bring the Jews back from all the Nations He had scattered them, which are also other detailed prophesied! And bringing them back was fullfilled after ww2. .. ... Thousands of years after these prophesies! Coincidence? Or is this inaccurate? Was Terrorism a Biblical Prophesy? Was the Middle East Crisis a Biblical Prophesy? How many points can we accumulate for - Bible Truth or Bible Lie? It almost seems if it weren't for Israel life wouldn't be quite as disturbed. How is it that 4000 years of these people who really didn't bring much on themselves historically, are the matter that brings TREMBLING (OR TERROR!!!) To the door of EVERY Nation? Has Israel been a burden to lift? When lifting Israel have those Nations face Trembling, and being cut into pieces? How did the Bible know Nations would lift Israel? What Nations back then lifted other Nations? Accurate prophesy? Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of TREMBLING unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it… For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle (Zech 12:2-3, Zech 14:2-3 KJV).” Side: I'll stick with evolution.
The ones you cited were vague, and one was, according to your own source, older than the believed date of the actual writing. All of the rest were based on people trying to interpret it by looking at then near contemporary history. None of those things are indisputably representative of the kingdoms they are said to predict. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
It almost seems if it weren't for Israel life wouldn't be quite as disturbed. How is it that 4000 years of these people who really didn't bring much on themselves historically, are the matter that brings trembling (OR TERROR!!!) To the door of EVERY Nation? Has Israel been a burden to lift? When lifting Israel have those Nations face Trembling, and being cut into pieces? And how did the Bible know Nations would lift Israel? What Nations back then lifted other Nations? Accurate prophesy? Crazy isn't it?? Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it… For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle (Zech 12:2-3, Zech 14:2-3 KJV).” Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel's King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah's death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead. (Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to 13th power) Side: I'll stick with evolution.
The prophet Isaiah foretold that a conqueror named Cyrus would destroy seemingly impregnable Babylon and subdue Egypt along with most of the rest of the known world. This same man, said Isaiah, would decide to let the Jewish exiles in his territory go free without any payment of ransom (Isaiah 44:28; 45:1; and 45:13). Isaiah made this prophecy 150 years before Cyrus was born, 180 years before Cyrus performed any of these feats (and he did, eventually, perform them all), and 80 years before the Jews were taken into exile. (Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to the 15th powrer.) Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Daniel predicted the four great kingdoms!! Bible prophecy: Daniel 2:32-33 Prophecy written: About 530 BC Prophecy fulfilled: Throughout history In Daniel 2:32-33, there is a prophetic passage that symbolically identified the four great kingdoms that would rise up and control much of world, beginning in Daniel's lifetime. The passage uses symbolic imagery: 1. The head of gold, as Daniel explained, refers to the Babylonian Empire that ruled much of the world about 2600 years ago. 2. Daniel said that the head-of-gold empire would be followed by an empire symbolized by arms of silver. Christian scholars have often interpreted this to refer to the Medo-Persian Empire which later conquered the Babylonian Empire. The scholars say that the two arms refer to the two groups - the Medes and the Persians - who comprised the Medo-Persian Empire. 3. The third kingdom was symbolized by the statue's belly and thighs of brass. Some scholars believe that this is a reference to the Grecian Empire, which conquered the Medo-Persian Empire. The symbol of a belly and thighs of brass suggests that the kingdom was to start out as a united empire but end up as a divided empire. Under the leadership of Alexander the Great, the Grecian Empire was a united empire. But after Alexander's death, the empire was divided up. 4. The fourth symbol - that of iron legs and feet that were part iron and part clay - has often been suggested to be a reference to the Roman Empire, which later conquered the Grecian Empire. These four kingdoms ruled over much of the world, and each of the four ruled over the land of Israel during times in which a significant number of Jews - and perhaps a majority of Jews - were living in their homeland. Before the collapse of the Roman Empire, Jerusalem was destroyed and hundreds of thousands of Jews were forced into exile. Even today, a majority of Jews live outside of Israel. Daniel 2:32-33 (NIV): 32 The head of the statue was made of pure gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, 33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of baked clay.
Side: I'll stick with evolution.
My take on immorality is Eternal Life. What is Light? Can it be in three time periods at the same time? Is there a place in the speed of light where time stands still? Is God known as Light? Does He give Eternal Life? Did anyone writing the Bible understand the speed of light, or was that a scientific realization of modern day? Then how or why would light and eternal life and Omnipresence meaning every where at once and Omniscience, knowing all things past present and future, why do you think light and these characteristics of the person who IS Light would somehow appear together, as characteristics found in God, who is The Light? Again did these ancient writers understand the science of Light? Side: I'll stick with evolution.
What is Light? Visually perceived radiant energy. Can it be in three time periods at the same time? No. Is God known as Light? I don't know. You tell me. Does He give Eternal Life? There is no way to have eternal life. Did anyone writing the Bible understand the speed of light, or was that a scientific realization of modern day? The speed of light was determined by Olas Roemer in 1676. Light is neither omniscient or omnipresent. Most religions equate light and day time with their gods, probably because night is scary and dangerous. Again did these ancient writers understand the science of Light? There is no evidence that they understood any form of science, much less how light works. Side: I have my own ideas.
If you want to minimize significance of light. Then ill consider it a difference of prespective. But you didn't answer anything I posted that was documentable in history. Truth or Lies? For the prophesy below to have come true, God would have had to have fulfilled three prophesies to match history! - To LINE UP WITH HISTORIC ACCURACY, There would have to be other prophesies fulfilled on which the prophesy below is dependent on. THREE PROPHESIES HAD TO BE ACCURATE FOR THIS, NOT JUST ONE!!! All three were fulfilled. 2 OTHER Bible Prophesies - 1 -to scatter them to all the Nations, and 2 - then bring the Jews back from all the Nations He had scattered them, which are also other detailed prophesied! And bringing them back was fullfilled after ww2. .. ... Thousands of years after these prophesies! Coincidence? Or is this inaccurate? Was Terrorism a Biblical Prophesy? Was the Middle East Crisis a Biblical Prophesy? How many points can we accumulate for - Bible Truth or Bible Lie? It almost seems if it weren't for Israel life wouldn't be quite as disturbed. How is it that 4000 years of these people who really didn't bring much on themselves historically, are the matter that brings TREMBLING (OR TERROR!!!) To the door of EVERY Nation? Has Israel been a burden to lift? When lifting Israel have those Nations face Trembling, and being cut into pieces? How did the Bible know Nations would lift Israel? What Nations back then lifted other Nations? Accurate prophesy? BIBLE PROPHESY Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of TREMBLING unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it… For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city. Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle (Zech 12:2-3, Zech 14:2-3 KJV).” Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1 -to scatter them to all the Nations Not uncommon. All of the 5 major religions have diaspora communities around the globe. There almost certainly American, British and Chinese folks in every country. The authors were Jews, and their people had already known war, slavery, mistreatment throughout their early history. It isn't much a stretch to think that a) they could believe that state of affairs would go on, b) that it actually WOULD go on. Not guaranteed, but far from unlikely. 2 - then bring the Jews back from all the Nations He had scattered them, which are also other detailed prophesied! And bringing them back was fulfilled after ww2. Interesting thing that. If the Christians hadn't converted the Torah into the OT, a lot of the prophecies would have been forgotten. Perhaps even the connection to the Jews. But of course, that's not what happened. The OT was common knowledge to the majority of Christians by WWII. Because the US and most UN member states were predominately Christian, elected officials were pressured to support and fund the modern foundation of Israel. You could call it a self-fulfilling prophecy. It almost seems if it weren't for Israel life wouldn't be quite as disturbed. What does Israel have to do with almost anything outside of its immediate vicinity over the past few years? Side: I have my own ideas.
1 -to scatter them to all the Nations Not uncommon. All of the 5 major religions have diaspora communities around the globe. There almost certainly American, British and Chinese folks in every country. The authors were Jews, and their people had already known war, slavery, mistreatment throughout their early history. It isn't much a stretch to think that a) they could believe that state of affairs would go on, b) that it actually WOULD go on. Not guaranteed, but far from unlikely. Can you show me your support of this. And also can you show prophetic notification declaring it will happen? And any purpose of it in pre-written history documented would be helpful. Thanks Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Can you show me your support of this. Of what? The first part is common knowledge. The second was logic-based speculation. And also can you show prophetic notification declaring it will happen? Of course not. You are the one supporting prophecy here. I'm the one who has skepticism regarding prophecy. And any purpose of it in pre-written history documented would be helpful. Yes, it would be very helpful to you to have this data. Unfortunately, I know of none, but feel free to research it. Side: I have my own ideas.
Yes it is. Everyone knows that everyone lives everywhere. I wouldn't even know where to start for finding a source, since it is so very common. If you are unaware of this, never spent time in a big city, read history, known people from other countries, I don't know what to say. Besides, I'm not the only one who can go online. Side: I have my own ideas.
The point of this as evidence, is that it is is detailed pre written history that has two other prophesies that also had to be fulfilled for it to be admitted as credible evidence. On what basis is your comparison credible evidence for comparisons?. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Like I said, there is nothing particularly unusual about the Jewish Diaspora. As far as the modern establishment of Israel, again, it is not too unbelievable that the mere presence of the "prophecy" in the Bible could have increased the likelihood of that event. Side: I have my own ideas.
I can only hope that you reread what I wrote a few times, and pause and ask yourself questions like, what was their experience, and how would those predictions make sense? Like, I can predict my mom may have a heart attack over the next ten years, we'll she has high blood pressure and sometimes it's out of control. So I can predict that and be probably 80 % sure that if she lives beyond 95, she will likely have a heart attack in 10 years, is an educated prediction. If you live in 1975, and understand the political climate, along with the rate of social, economical, and technical advancements and progress, I can make scenarios that are a likely prediction, maybe greater than a 30 % chance I'd be correct. Spreading years further. Say you were in 1776, you could make a series of predictions for Americas future based on knowledge you have of other civilizations, and studies of governments, historical and current frictions, wars, climate, and political patterns. And you could have a high % of direct hits on some predictions, and also dead wrong in other predictions. Say a guy goes to Luna the fortune teller. The guy is a single good looking guy, Luna could predict the guy would find of the love of his life in the summer next year, that's a deductive prediction of fortune telling. Almost like the Captain Obvious in predictions. And we hear every day claims of "I knew it!" "I could feel it!" Or "I predicted that would happen!" There is a broad base of knowledge to draw from for higher accuracy of predictions in all of these types of predictions. With that there is an acceptable margin of error that we grade on the curve as perfect predictions, making real prophesy equal to predictions, an then equalize prophesy, desensitized to the difference. So when we hear "Bible Prophesy" we define it somewhere between all of these types of predictions that's our experience and understanding of predictions or prophesies. But none of these types of predictions are equal to Biblical Prophesy. Biblical Prophesy isn't a prediction. It is pre-written history with a level of no allowance for margin of error. The prophets prophesied times and time periods. They prophesied changes in political, regional, geographical, social, economical, religious factors and changes in peace and war. And changes in war. The Bible prophesied the rise and fall of Kingdoms, of Kings, and of Rulers. The Bible Prophesied names enemies and friends, and prophesied every detail beginning to end, all in the pages of the Bible. The prophets prophesied with complete accuracy, all the time and often from no point of reference. No basis to dream up or imagine events. It would be like Moses predicting the Internet. No point of reference. If you have a phone you can dream up a cell phone, if communication by camel is all you know, your not dreaming up faxing or emailing a letter. There is point of reference for our imagination. Well the prophets point of reference couldn't have dreamed up the accurate details of their prophesies. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
My argument is God has proven Himself through history, as the Bible was being written. Can you show me how it's not detailed in prophesy with an accuracy as if history was knit together, as your cells in evolution? And can you show me any historical documentations of the Bible that is riddled with inaccuracies? Another Prophesy: Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel's King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah's death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead. (Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to 13th power.) . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
This scripture prophesy also have a cluster of prophesies that would need to be fullfilled for each to be fulfilled. So prophetic intrusion by God in His Word, takes predictions to prophesy, which is predictions based on possibility, to prophesy - pre-written history, which is complicated. But it also knits prophesies together in clusters like cells, building history. Complicating even miracles of prophesy to clusters of prophesies ALL needing to be fullfilled for the next in a cluster. If you really look at prophesy, and realize it's difference from "predictions" Then you realize prophesy is like layers, with many prophesies knit together like cells all dependent on each other for each individual fulfillment, I think it's a greater feat than cells mutating and accidentally on purpose resulting in intellegent design! . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
This scripture prophesy also have a cluster of prophesies that would need to be fullfilled for each to be fulfilled. So prophetic intrusion by God in His Word, takes predictions to prophesy, which is predictions based on possibility, to prophesy - pre-written history, which is complicated. But it also knits prophesies together in clusters like cells, building history. Complicating even miracles of prophesy to clusters of prophesies ALL needing to be fullfilled for the next in a cluster. If you really look at prophesy, and realize it's difference from "predictions" Then you realize prophesy is like layers, with many prophesies knit together like cells all dependent on each other for each individual fulfillment, I think it's a greater feat than cells mutating and accidentally on purpose resulting in intellegent design! My argument is God has proven Himself through history, as the Bible was being written. Can you show me how it's not detailed in prophesy with an accuracy as if history was knit together, as your cells in evolution? And can you show me any historical documentations of the Bible that is riddled with inaccuracies? Another Prophesy: Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel's King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah's death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead. (Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to 13th power.) . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Well the gospels are eye witness accounts and actual biography. Most historians confirm this. The question for the skeptic really lies in the belief of Resurection and other miracles. But as a Biography, that isn't disputable by any reasonable argument. And there also has been forensic analysis done that would make the 4 gospels written collaborating the detailed stories impossible. If you take 2 executives, brainy people of modern day, and they set out a conspiracy, (without luxury of government coverups - as in Hillary) But just executives frauding people, and caught and under investigation, a series of questions would detail inconsistencies that are indications of lies in testimony. So just 2 people in short term with details of 1 thread of events would likely unravel. And that's not the case with the 4 gospels, a forensic would confirm it, many have. 1 in particular has, and he started as a passionate atheist, and after months of review determined these were true eyewitness accounts. Here is a quick clips from an atheist turned Christian through investigation. . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americandiaspora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Britishdiaspora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OverseasChinese Does that help? Side: I have my own ideas.
Atheists near death experience: Side: I'll stick with evolution.
There is no such thing as "strong" or "weak" mutations. Nor are the dominant ones or weak ones. All mutations are originally equal at their primal genetic level. That is, they are all simply consist of a strand of DNA code that has an abberation from the norm inside of it. Say....a TA.GCTATATAGC strand becomes a TAGCTATGCTAGC. See? No strong or weak. Just a minor "flaw" in the order of the nucleotides. The way selective inheritance works is, that only those genetic mutations which provide their hosts with a physiological trait that proves advantageous end-up being passed on to progeny. And then after many generations, what was once an aberration, or a mutations, becomes the norm. As it is the fortunate species members that originally had the desirable mutations who end-up dominating and thriving in such a manner as to vanquish (or surpass) their less-fortunate counterparts. Like the giraffes. they are actually of the equine family. Horses! the ones that originally had the genetic mutation that "coded" for longer necks were able to reach more food on higher tree branches. So in time they thrived over their shorter-necked brethren. Hope this helps. SS Oh....here ya go....from an online article on PBS about Evolution FAQ's for the lay-person.......... Are evolution and "survival of the fittest" the same thing? Evolution and "survival of the fittest" are not the same thing. Evolution refers to the cumulative changes in a population or species through time. "Survival of the fittest" is a popular term that refers to the process of natural selection, a mechanism that drives evolutionary change. Natural selection works by giving individuals who are better adapted to a given set of environmental conditions an advantage over those that are not as well adapted. Survival of the fittest usually makes one think of the biggest, strongest, or smartest individuals being the winners, but in a biological sense, evolutionary fitness refers to the ability to survive and reproduce in a particular environment. Popular interpretations of "survival of the fittest" typically ignore the importance of both reproduction and cooperation. To survive but not pass on one's genes to the next generation is to be biologically unfit. And many organisms are the "fittest" because they cooperate with other organisms, rather than competing with them. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
How close in time frames did species come into being from others? And why did we stop evolving. What was the magic button we pushed to stop evolving? An even better question, why aren't things around us still evolving? and what made other creatures drop evolving? And we are not talking about adaptation! To me, all your explanations seem to require evolution to have a mind! . Side: I'll stick with evolution.
Evolution involves slow changes over time. When 2 species emerge from the same species there was shall changes that caused them to no longer be able to breed. That's evolution. It is relevant because you said evolution isn't seen any more. That statement is false. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
The term dominance in genetics refers to phenotypes of different genes. The phenotype determines the observable traits. When there is a mixture of phenotypes and only one is observable it is dominant. That can happen when the proteins created by the gene are more efficient. Side: I have my own ideas.
Hmm...only partially correct. The phenotype really has "no say" (to use a figure of speech) in whether or not the [physiological trait caused by the genetic mutation turns out to be adapted by its host organism. As I explained in my OP above, THAT occurrence, if and when it ever happens, depends on whether said trait is advantageous for the host given its current environment Also you misused the word dominance. When used in biology it is almost always referring to recessive and/or dominant genes. And what determines THAT is whether or not the are coded on or off. DNA DOES have a binary-type "switching" component to it. Although that is a slight over-generalization. SS Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
1
point
I don't even particularly remember writing that post, but I can try and answer what you've got wouldn't selective mutations obey their genes for survival, reproduction, and dominance? Mutations don't obey anything. As far as can be reasoned, any specific mutation happens on chance. Generally, mutations will occur from the mixing of genetic information during conception or through the damaging of the DNA via ionising radiation. Mutations will generally pull the genes and therefore traits of an organism in random directions, sometimes beneficial, but usually neutral or damaging. Our ecosystem is set up such that organisms with traits that happen to give them an advantage over others is more likely to pass on it's genes and thereby 'exist' as a species. by doing so limit or eliminate exclusively for its own survival and progress? I don't follow what you mean here we can't really expect high thought, so we can't apply our thought process to the process, just basic cell reproduction, and there can be that smart gene, that remembers an experience to assist in progress. As far as is known, you can't expect thought at all out of cells, their DNA or their genes whatsoever. Cells and their internals follow an automated process both using and stimulated by complex proteins, hormones and other compounds I know nothing about. This process supposedly originates from a more simple process in an ancestor that has mutated by chance in a way that has made it eventually what it is over countless generations of mutations. As far as I know, there are no such collections of DNA that will remember experiences. Generally, experiences have no affect on genes, or at least those that will be passed on to a child organism. Mutations/shuffling involved during conception is typically all the information passed down to the next generation. Mutations from experiences (actually copying errors or from ionising radiating) almost always end up being neutral/harmless, but when they are noticed, it's usually in the form of cancer. animals don't protect the survival of their prey, they just obey hunger. If you want to read up on it a little, there's a book called 'the selfish gene' which basically attempts to define a line between the motivations of DNA, genes, cells, organisms (the individual) and species (the group), and tries to determine the existence of altruism. For your question though... Animals need to eat something, because they need energy to perform actions to survive. A plant will 'eat' sunlight, a herbivore will eat plants, a carnivore will eat animals that eat plants. Animals that protect their food even from themselves will not be eating food, and will die, so you would not see them today. Perhaps at some point in the past an animal developed in a way that it would not eat its prey. However this animal would have no energy to do anything, and would die, not having reproduced and not passed on its trait of not eating other animals. It would have existed for a tiny portion of time, not even a full generation and so you would not see that particular animal with that trait today as it isn't a 'model' of animal that works. So in this rapidly multiplying field of evolving life forms, who defined the boundaries so the weaker life forms could survive and progress at an even rate to result in the full appreciation of all of nature, seemingly all at once? In our world, there aren't really "weaker lifeforms" in an easy sense of the term. Similar organisms will be either specialised to a specific environment or lifestyle which a competitor will either not be or will do differently, and each will be better at survival under different conditions. Organisms also survive by using entirely different methods or sources for food to others that would mean not competing. I guess the only "weaker lifeforms" there are that survive would be those that are eaten, but there are a couple of ways around this too. An example is that every plant is poisonous, and animals have a sort of cold war with plants, trying to combat these poisons, it's why animals can't eat certain things while others can. Others include thick hides, quick evaisive movements, sharp senses, horns on rhinos and elephants, spines on hedgehogs, smells from skunks.. But, even with few of these advantages, an animal lower in the food chain has to be a reproduce a certain number of offspring for a certain amount of predators. If the population of a prey goes down, so does that of the creatures eating that prey as the predators begin to die off from starvation, so there is a sort of natural balance to an extent. Lastly, all of nature didn't happen all at once, it has occurred over time, and is still occurring. Evidence of the trial and error process of nature is the existence of the sheer number of failures. People have discovered countless fossils recording the life of once existing species. Even the possibilities of animals going extinct today infers extinction in the past. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
I mean, I too can come up with some crazy ass shit theory ;) Of course you can, amigo. But I feel you would be better off forgetting all that and instead just simply studying a bit more on the Theory of Evolution. As it is painfully obvious from your posts here that you are very confused about even its basic, primary tenets. Your "super computer in the sand" metaphor proved that. Or maybe just a plain ol' Biology 101 class? Hope this helps. And let me know if I can answer any questions for you. SS Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
You asked in a debate I was banned in by Saintnow why Jesus suffered 6 hours. What He did can be found described in science, in part. And described in detail in the Bible. To understand one thing you have to understand other things. First what was the fall really? We understand it as removed from the garden, not living in fellowship with God, struggles, labor pains, and returning to dust. And Jesus, what did He do? And why? First the dilemma. People don't often "feel lost" we sometimes "feel broken" and some may "feel hopeless" but all in all life seems pretty good. We can ignore many things and still be "happy" The most "healthy" among us have good outlooks in life, right? So religion is for the "weak" and "needy" or to "feel good" Not understanding the fall would leave this impression. So lets understand the fall. There are many things to understand in the fall. I want to focus on one part that pertains to the statements, "you will surely you shall die" and "to dust you shall return." The brokenness of man is what Jesus came to heal. To bring hope to the hopeless end of man. Jesus came to give hope where there literally was no hope. And to seek the lost who would be left wandering as disembodied souls, in hopelessness and in darkness. To offer healing to the brokenness of the disembodied soul, eternally lost and eternally dead, eternally disembodied. Is that one dimention?
The Father saw the broken hopelessness of the lost souls of men and there was only one way to heal their brokenness. And the walk in our dust, to as He says, Bread broken for us. He had to walk through our brokenness as innocent in the whole law. He had to master flesh and then break it on the cross. With forgiveness in the flow of His innocent blood. Through it He ransomed the dust that was under the serpent. Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, sweat blood in requesting it pass, if there were another way. So Jesus actually plainly and matter of factly answered and said there were no other options. If you understand light, spltting in a particle accelerator that was like what He did, then He faced Hell, disembodied in the wandering and He took keys of their brokenness away from the jailor so He can make body and soul whole again. And in the 3rd day, which is for a judicial precept or relative to the time frame would be 3rd day of creation. Which was all about the earth and growth. So then He raised His dust that was under the judgment of brokenness, and the hopelessmess of disembodied souls. And He walked out with power over death, with the keys to our dust in His hand.
So thats the answer to what He did, and the why He did it, and why it was required. Light properties: If a single photon can demonstrate double-slit interference, then which slit did it pass through? The unavoidable answer must be that it passes through both! This might not seem so strange if we think of the photon as a wave, but it is highly counterintuitive if we try to visualize it as a particle. The moral is that we should not think in terms of the path of a photon. Like the fully human and fully divine Jesus of Christian theology, a photon is supposed to be 100% wave and 100% particle. Side: I'll stick with evolution.
1
point
You are correct of course but these bigots on the Left hate the very thought of Christianity or a God. These insecure people want to live their self consumed lives with no God or no person speaking of moral choices. They want their one night hook ups, and if the girl gets pregnant...NOT THEIR FAULT! Tax payers will have to raise the idiot dead beat's child while he will go through life wondering why his father abandoned him. So they will believe any far fetched thing to keep from any notions of personal accountbility for one's choices in life. Therefore they actualy believe that our complex DNA just randomly occured over many years. I have a bridge for these people to buy. Faith in God is a thousand times more plausible answer to our creation than the ludicrous theory of evolution. No one has the proof. No one has all the answers. All we can do is look at life. See how badly the Godless are destroying this nation. They have absolutely no common sense to what is causing all our problems. If you speak to them about the broken homes, and children having no fathers to discipline and love them, these space cadets look at you like you are on some other planet. They have the wisdom of a rock! Side: I have my own ideas.
Side: I have my own ideas.
|