Which Came First Creation Or Evolution?

[G.T.]

The chicken came first.

uh, no the egg did.

The chicken had to lay an egg.

This is an answered question, yannow.

No chicken was ever born any other way than via an egg.

This first chicken egg was a mutation of its evolutionary predecessor.

Or are you positing that the 1st chicken was not born via an egg, but some other means of birth lolllll!

 

[Rambunctious]

Ha ha. The flask would have to be open to the air and bacteria get in. This would not happen in a sealed flask. Easily demonstrated by experiment.

I never said sealed....nothing can evolve without existing in the first place...maybe you need to rephrase your thread question...

 

[Taz]

The chicken came first.

uh, no the egg did.

The chicken had to lay an egg.

This is an answered question, yannow.

No chicken was ever born any other way than via an egg.

This first chicken egg was a mutation of its evolutionary predecessor.

Or are you positing that the 1st chicken was not born via an egg, but some other means of birth lolllll!

Only a chicken can lay a chicken egg, so the chicken had to have come first.

 

[G.T.]

The chicken came first.

uh, no the egg did.

The chicken had to lay an egg.

This is an answered question, yannow.

No chicken was ever born any other way than via an egg.

This first chicken egg was a mutation of its evolutionary predecessor.

Or are you positing that the 1st chicken was not born via an egg, but some other means of birth lolllll!

Only a chicken can lay a chicken egg, so the chicken had to have come first.

Yes, the 1st chicken was born by osmosis.

 

[Syriusly]

We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

You whacky Christo Creation Cultists and your silly myths.

When it comes to 'theories'- certainly Creation myths came first- all sorts of creation myths around the world were created to come up with explanations of how the world was- the Bible was of course just one of thousands.

The Theory of Evolution came about after the concept of science was established and the Bible and other creation myths were shown to be out of step with scientific understanding.

Now the Theory of Evolution is the theory that best fits our knowledge for how life now exists on Earth, while the Christo Creation Cult theory just represents a fringe group of anti-science nutcases who believe that there were dinosaurs on an Ark that floated over Mt. Everest.

 

[Taz]

The chicken came first.

uh, no the egg did.

The chicken had to lay an egg.

This is an answered question, yannow.

No chicken was ever born any other way than via an egg.

This first chicken egg was a mutation of its evolutionary predecessor.

Or are you positing that the 1st chicken was not born via an egg, but some other means of birth lolllll!

Only a chicken can lay a chicken egg, so the chicken had to have come first.

Yes, the 1st chicken was born by osmosis.

An the first chicken egg laid itself.

 

[BlackFlag]

It is funny to see all those that they claim to believe in evolution, yet do not practice or support it.

Whether you believe or support it or not, we are all practicing it.

And how are you practicing it?

And here I thought I had already seen the stupidest question of the day a few threads ago

TRANSLATION: Shit! Got called out on the carpet again and I haven't a fucking single smart thing to say to actually cover my ass! Never thought anyone would call my bluff and expect me to actually EXPLAIN one of my shitstain-stupid remarks!

Lol the guy who thinks 2=1 complains people aren’t smart

You shouldn’t practice evolution. Do the world and gene pool a favor, and continue being celibate.

 

[james bond]

Ha ha. The flask would have to be open to the air and bacteria get in. This would not happen in a sealed flask. Easily demonstrated by experiment.

I never said sealed....nothing can evolve without existing in the first place...maybe you need to rephrase your thread question...

Your understanding of creation is different from mine. Yours is capturing bacteria and then growing it which is common. Decades ago scientists thought life came into existence through spontaneous generation and this was one of the experimental "proofs." Louis Pasteur debunked spontaneous generation with his own experiment and rendered it pseudoscience. Next, the evolutionists came up with the Miller-Urey experiment and abilogenesis which has been rendered pseudoscience, too.

 

[james bond]

We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

You whacky Christo Creation Cultists and your silly myths.

When it comes to 'theories'- certainly Creation myths came first- all sorts of creation myths around the world were created to come up with explanations of how the world was- the Bible was of course just one of thousands.

The Theory of Evolution came about after the concept of science was established and the Bible and other creation myths were shown to be out of step with scientific understanding.

Now the Theory of Evolution is the theory that best fits our knowledge for how life now exists on Earth, while the Christo Creation Cult theory just represents a fringe group of anti-science nutcases who believe that there were dinosaurs on an Ark that floated over Mt. Everest.

We already discussed this. The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

As Dr. Morris correctly surmised, Satan's influence still remains with us as today's scientists will not peer-review God, the supernatural or any hypothesis based on the Bible such as Genesis. It wasn't like this before the 1850s. Creation scientists have to peer review their own work.

I will have to give you this. What's interesting is creation scientists cannot disprove evolution which means proving creation. They can only give evidence of creation and debunk ToE and evolutionary thinking. We can get close to having a smoking gun, but there won't be a final answer. God designed it that way. Thus, it's evolution trying to disprove creation which shows that creation did actually come first. The Bible describes evolutionists as, "They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.” Romans 1:25

Notice God considers what Satan came up with as a lie. Even though that was not Satan's intent. He came up with a theory which is wrong, but considered a lie in the eyes of God.

 

[Tax Man]

Dr. Henry Morris, states, "One question remains. Assuming Satan to be the real source of the evolutionary concept, how did it originate in his mind? . . . A possible answer to this mystery could be that Satan, the father of lies, has not only deceived the whole world and the angelic hosts who followed him--he has even deceived himself! The only way he could really know about creation (just as the only way we can know about creation) was for God to tell him! . . . . He refused to believe and accept the Word of God concerning his own creation and place in God's economy . . . He therefore deceived himself into supposing that all things, including himself and including God, had been evolved by natural processes out of the primordial stuff of the universe. . . ." (Morris, Troubled Waters of Evolution, 1974, pp 74-75)."

He is correct in stating that we know about creation through the Bible or God's Word. Evolution came afterward as we see during the times of Paul, the Epicureans and Stoics.

http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/devil.htm

"The Theory of Biological Evolution is most often associated with Charles Darwin, because it was Charles Darwin that proposed the mechanism of natural selection and accompanied that proposition with a large volume of empirical data providing evidence for biological evolution.

Darwin was not, however, the first person to propose an evolutionary explanation for the diversity of life on earth. In fact, evolutionary concepts about life date far back into history and arose in many different cultures. The Greeks developed a concept of evolution over 2,300 years ago that was basically equivalent to that of Charles Darwin's, but the early Christians opposed the idea and destroyed all of the works that promoted it or any other naturalistic explanations for earthly phenomena."

Understanding Evolution: History, Theory, Evidence, and Implictions

ETA: Both of my sources are atheist, so they could be lying. Still, the first one brings up an interesting question. We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

The egg came first as the chicken was ?

 

[edthecynic]

Assuming Satan to be the real source of the evolutionary concept,...
Satan, the father of lies

When you assume, you make an ASS of U and ME.

Since God "created" Satan, than God is the father of the father of lies!

You just made an ass of yourself. God created Lucifer as an angel who became his greatest angel. Lucifer became Satan ....

Thank you.

 

[edthecynic]

The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

No, they would have to all occurred at the same time to validate the bible lie. Many of those myths are thousands of years apart, and many are before the so called biblical creation 6 to 10,000 years ago.

 

[james bond]

Dr. Henry Morris, states, "One question remains. Assuming Satan to be the real source of the evolutionary concept, how did it originate in his mind? . . . A possible answer to this mystery could be that Satan, the father of lies, has not only deceived the whole world and the angelic hosts who followed him--he has even deceived himself! The only way he could really know about creation (just as the only way we can know about creation) was for God to tell him! . . . . He refused to believe and accept the Word of God concerning his own creation and place in God's economy . . . He therefore deceived himself into supposing that all things, including himself and including God, had been evolved by natural processes out of the primordial stuff of the universe. . . ." (Morris, Troubled Waters of Evolution, 1974, pp 74-75)."

He is correct in stating that we know about creation through the Bible or God's Word. Evolution came afterward as we see during the times of Paul, the Epicureans and Stoics.

http://www.huecotanks.com/debunk/devil.htm

"The Theory of Biological Evolution is most often associated with Charles Darwin, because it was Charles Darwin that proposed the mechanism of natural selection and accompanied that proposition with a large volume of empirical data providing evidence for biological evolution.

Darwin was not, however, the first person to propose an evolutionary explanation for the diversity of life on earth. In fact, evolutionary concepts about life date far back into history and arose in many different cultures. The Greeks developed a concept of evolution over 2,300 years ago that was basically equivalent to that of Charles Darwin's, but the early Christians opposed the idea and destroyed all of the works that promoted it or any other naturalistic explanations for earthly phenomena."

Understanding Evolution: History, Theory, Evidence, and Implictions

ETA: Both of my sources are atheist, so they could be lying. Still, the first one brings up an interesting question. We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

The egg came first as the chicken was ?

In 2017, science backed up the Bible with the finding of a protein found on the eggshell. This protein can only come from an ovary of the chicken. We know that proteins can only be created inside the cell and not outside. Thus, the chicken came first.

 

[edthecynic]

We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

Now the Theory of Evolution is the theory that best fits our knowledge for how life now exists on Earth, while the Christo Creation Cult theory just represents a fringe group of anti-science nutcases who believe that there were dinosaurs on an Ark that floated over Mt. Everest.

We already discussed this. The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

 

[james bond]

The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

No, they would have to all occurred at the same time to validate the bible lie. Many of those myths are thousands of years apart, and many are before the so called biblical creation 6 to 10,000 years ago.

What you said can't be true because creation came first. There was no way for communication to travel from one part of the world to another. And these myths are found all around the world, so they had to be passed down through the generations. The myth of evolution didn't really become accepted until after Darwin, but there were the Epicureans and Stoics who took Paul to Areopagus in order to learn about Jesus and the Resurrection. This is written in the Bible as historical record, and eventually the Bible became taught throughout the world. The myth of evolution took longer to spread and be accepted.

Many of the greatest scientists in the past believed in creation. Today, the creation scientists are left out and those who believe have to go along with the fake science in order to keep their jobs. Fortunately, evolution is the worst only in biology, geology, zoology and astronomy. There are a few who can profess their belief in Bible theory and still keep their jobs. Others have to get jobs within the Christian science communities.

 

[james bond]

We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

Now the Theory of Evolution is the theory that best fits our knowledge for how life now exists on Earth, while the Christo Creation Cult theory just represents a fringe group of anti-science nutcases who believe that there were dinosaurs on an Ark that floated over Mt. Everest.

We already discussed this. The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

As I said, geology (along with biology, zoology and astronomy) is one of the areas where evolution has its biggest lies.

 

[Syriusly]

The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

No, they would have to all occurred at the same time to validate the bible lie. Many of those myths are thousands of years apart, and many are before the so called biblical creation 6 to 10,000 years ago.

What you said can't be true because creation came first. There was no way for communication to travel from one part of the world to another. And these myths are found all around the world, so they had to be passed down through the generations. The myth of evolution didn't really become accepted until after Darwin, but there were the Epicureans and Stoics who took Paul to Areopagus in order to learn about Jesus and the Resurrection. This is written in the Bible as historical record, and eventually the Bible became taught throughout the world. The myth of evolution took longer to spread and be accepted.

Many of the greatest scientists in the past believed in creation. Today, the creation scientists are left out and those who believe have to go along with the fake science in order to keep their jobs. Fortunately, evolution is the worst only in biology, geology, zoology and astronomy. There are a few who can profess their belief in Bible theory and still keep their jobs. Others have to get jobs within the Christian science communities.

'Christian science communities'

LOL

 

[Syriusly]

We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

Now the Theory of Evolution is the theory that best fits our knowledge for how life now exists on Earth, while the Christo Creation Cult theory just represents a fringe group of anti-science nutcases who believe that there were dinosaurs on an Ark that floated over Mt. Everest.

We already discussed this. The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

As I said, geology (along with biology, zoology and astronomy) is one of the areas where evolution has its biggest lies.

Why A Million People Follow A Woman Who Says She's Channeling The Archangels

HEAVEN IS A PLACE ONLINE
Why A Million People Follow A Woman Who Says She's Channeling The Archangels

 

[james bond]

We find science backs up the Bible, but science doesn't back up evolution. Thus, the first one is the truth and not the myth.

Now the Theory of Evolution is the theory that best fits our knowledge for how life now exists on Earth, while the Christo Creation Cult theory just represents a fringe group of anti-science nutcases who believe that there were dinosaurs on an Ark that floated over Mt. Everest.

We already discussed this. The myths are found all around the world, so they had to come from something global in scale which validates the truth in the Bible.

As I said, geology (along with biology, zoology and astronomy) is one of the areas where evolution has its biggest lies.

Why A Million People Follow A Woman Who Says She's Channeling The Archangels

HEAVEN IS A PLACE ONLINE
Why A Million People Follow A Woman Who Says She's Channeling The Archangels

The Bible warns against believing people like her. Archangels as messengers and protectors are true, but she's not channeling any archangel.

Who's more the nutcase? A believer who believes that God created the universe and earth or someone like Stephen Hawking who died trying to show that multiverses exist, God rolls the dice and an universe sprang forth from an invisible point called singularity? He couldn't figure out why we are here and where do we come from? Were his last words, "There is nothing like heaven or hell. There are no fixed stars."? His first statement could be taken in different ways. The fixed stars could be a comment that when one dies, their spirit is like that of tiny moving invisible stars that get taken away from earth in an instant.

 

[james bond]

You can FF to 4:34 for the answer.