Evolution is a False Religion not Proven Science.

[PratchettFan]

If you don't believe that god plopped down Adam fully formed and made Eve out of his rib, then you're not a Christian. Kinda simple really.

If you don't wear bunny ears on alternative Thursdays, then you're not a human being.

So I'm good, then? Or do they have to be pink?

No need to get dogmatic. Any color is fine, but they have to be fuzzy,

 

[The Irish Ram]

What I have shown is that those particular instances cannot have occurred exactly as described.

There is an error in your logic. You are relying on your intelligence. Your 10% of active brain knowledge.

God's thoughts and ways are far above our own. He can make things occur exactly as described. He is not working with limited understanding like you and I are. For instance, He created dimensions long ago, and then went on to describe their properties. We just now found them, and have no idea about their properties.

 

[Ancient lion]

To the Creationists:

Is mankind animal, vegetable or mineral? I know it sounds silly at first read, but I think that Creationists are not about to admit that Homo Sapiens is part of the animal kingdom. You fervently believe that mankind was 'created' separately from all other animal life. You believe that mankind emerged upon the scene wholly formed, like a potted geranium. That mankind was 'created in the image of God' and therefore uniquely immune to the vagaries of evolution.

I further believe that you Creationists see the theory of evolution as a means to refute God. And that you see the theory of evolution as flawed because of its packaging as 'theory', not law.

Evolution does not refute God. It does refute the mythology set forth in Genesis. Evolution, along with Biology in general are tools to understand the mechanics of the natural world. This understanding is granted by God due to our massive brain pans. Do you suppose mankind would have advanced from a nomadic people to a species capable of travelling from the earth itself without science and mathematics? Why then should mankind be shackled to mythology?

Other cultures developed an origin of the species myth. Why should the myth of Genesis be the only valid one? Why should this myth be taught in science classes?

You mean by " Creationists", those who know that "God" created the whole universe. So non-creationists are -by def- agnostics or atheists ?!

 

[Nosmo King]

To the Creationists:

Is mankind animal, vegetable or mineral? I know it sounds silly at first read, but I think that Creationists are not about to admit that Homo Sapiens is part of the animal kingdom. You fervently believe that mankind was 'created' separately from all other animal life. You believe that mankind emerged upon the scene wholly formed, like a potted geranium. That mankind was 'created in the image of God' and therefore uniquely immune to the vagaries of evolution.

I further believe that you Creationists see the theory of evolution as a means to refute God. And that you see the theory of evolution as flawed because of its packaging as 'theory', not law.

Evolution does not refute God. It does refute the mythology set forth in Genesis. Evolution, along with Biology in general are tools to understand the mechanics of the natural world. This understanding is granted by God due to our massive brain pans. Do you suppose mankind would have advanced from a nomadic people to a species capable of travelling from the earth itself without science and mathematics? Why then should mankind be shackled to mythology?

Other cultures developed an origin of the species myth. Why should the myth of Genesis be the only valid one? Why should this myth be taught in science classes?

You mean by " Creationists", those who know that "God" created the whole universe. So non-creationists are -by def- agnostics or atheists ?!

Hardly. I am a Christian and I believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. But I am not a literalist nor an absolutist.

I know that the Bible is a book of great inspiration and spirituality. It is also a book of parable. It is also a chronicle of God's actions and interactions with mankind. The Bible is also filled with stories of sex, war, violence, comedy, drama, poetry and love. But the Bible is not a textbook for scientific understanding. It is not a geology text nor an astronomy text, nor a Biology text. Those scientific pursuits are not driven by the writings in the Bible.

I don't understand that absolutist attitude among Creationists. It's as ridiculous as "you're either with us or against us". Evolution does not refute the existence of God. It only refutes the mythology set forth in Genesis.

 

[BillyP]

To the Creationists:

Is mankind animal, vegetable or mineral? I know it sounds silly at first read, but I think that Creationists are not about to admit that Homo Sapiens is part of the animal kingdom. You fervently believe that mankind was 'created' separately from all other animal life. You believe that mankind emerged upon the scene wholly formed, like a potted geranium. That mankind was 'created in the image of God' and therefore uniquely immune to the vagaries of evolution.

I further believe that you Creationists see the theory of evolution as a means to refute God. And that you see the theory of evolution as flawed because of its packaging as 'theory', not law.

Evolution does not refute God. It does refute the mythology set forth in Genesis. Evolution, along with Biology in general are tools to understand the mechanics of the natural world. This understanding is granted by God due to our massive brain pans. Do you suppose mankind would have advanced from a nomadic people to a species capable of travelling from the earth itself without science and mathematics? Why then should mankind be shackled to mythology?

Other cultures developed an origin of the species myth. Why should the myth of Genesis be the only valid one? Why should this myth be taught in science classes?

You mean by " Creationists", those who know that "God" created the whole universe. So non-creationists are -by def- agnostics or atheists ?!

Hardly. I am a Christian and I believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. But I am not a literalist nor an absolutist.

I know that the Bible is a book of great inspiration and spirituality. It is also a book of parable. It is also a chronicle of God's actions and interactions with mankind. The Bible is also filled with stories of sex, war, violence, comedy, drama, poetry and love. But the Bible is not a textbook for scientific understanding. It is not a geology text nor an astronomy text, nor a Biology text. Those scientific pursuits are not driven by the writings in the Bible.

I don't understand that absolutist attitude among Creationists. It's as ridiculous as "you're either with us or against us". Evolution does not refute the existence of God. It only refutes the mythology set forth in Genesis.

If you don't believe genesis, you're not a Christian, it's that simple.

 

[BillyP]

What I have shown is that those particular instances cannot have occurred exactly as described.

There is an error in your logic. You are relying on your intelligence. Your 10% of active brain knowledge.

God's thoughts and ways are far above our own. He can make things occur exactly as described. He is not working with limited understanding like you and I are. For instance, He created dimensions long ago, and then went on to describe their properties. We just now found them, and have no idea about their properties.

He also makes deformed babies, disease, cancer, Ebola...

 

[Steven_R]

Riddle me this, if the scientific accuracy of the Bible, (inherent, ineffable, infallible Word of God and all that) can't be trusted to get junior high math right, why in the world should I be expected to just throw away the four centuries of scientific work we've done in favor of said Bible?

perhaps because anyone with a lick of intelligence would realize that the Bible wasn't written to teach you mathematics.....now again, what scientific work of the last four centuries do you have to throw away to believe in what the Bible says about God, you, and your relationship?......

We've been having this exact same conversation since 1543 when Copernicus had an idea that the Earth wasn't the center of Creation. The Bible is many things, but it's not a science text. But it also can't be wrong, can't be inaccurate, can't be open to interpretation because if it is anything but the literal truth direct from God, then what?

The evolution debate isn't about unanswered questions about transitional fossils and genetic markers and carbon dating methods. It's about if we weren't actually created in the Garden of Eden, then what else do we have to reconsider? If humans really are descended from a common ancestor with apes, then are we really touched by God or is there some bit of human dignity that we are just imagining? It comes down to small minded people uncomfortable with having to deal with those questions and convincing people who are scientifically illiterate that the science is just plain wrong.

 

[Steven_R]

wiser than the average atheist, I've been told......

Remember geometry in 9th grade? You might have been exposed to the formula for circumference of a circle. C=2πr

Turns out that math in the Bible is slightly different. Seems Solomon was building some stuff for God's Temple, including big bowl thing. The Bible very clearly says the diameter of this bowl thing was "ten cubits from the one brim to the other" but the circumference of this big bowl thing was "and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." (1 Kings 7:23)

If the diameter is 10 cubits, that means the radius is 5 cubits (because 1 diameter is equal to 2 radii. 10/2=5). So using our formula, we can plug in the values we have. So

C=2*π*5
So our answer is 31.416 cubits

Wait a minute. Our answer is 31.416 cubits, but the Bible answer is 30.0 cubits exactly.

What gives? Is the Bible wrong or is math? If it's the literal truth, is rounding down consistent with every word being the Inherent and Ineffable Word of God?

So maybe a talking ass is wiser than me, but at least I can still do junior high math.

A cubit was the length from a person's elbow to their fingertips, so it was a subjective unit of measurement to begin with.

Well, since it doesn't say that bowl was 10 Bob cubits in diameter and 30 Joe cubits in circumference, the only logical conclusion is that the unit of measurement when describing that bowl was used throughout the entire process.

The mental gymnastics some people use to defend the indefensible is astonishing. Maybe, just maybe, the Bible is inaccurate in describing that bowl.

 

[pinqy]

What I have shown is that those particular instances cannot have occurred exactly as described.

There is an error in your logic. You are relying on your intelligence.

Which is what you need for logic. And I have yet to find any method of knowledge more reliable than logic and reason.

Your 10% of active brain knowledge.

Good example....you're citing a myth. We actually do use 100% of our brain.

God's thoughts and ways are far above our own. He can make things occur exactly as described. He is not working with limited understanding like you and I are. For instance, He created dimensions long ago, and then went on to describe their properties. We just now found them, and have no idea about their properties.

First, the story of Jacob and the striped branches doesn't claim God's intervention (well, Jacob does later give credit to God, but the story itself is told as a natural process). So adding in "God did it" is not the way it was described, so my claim holds true.

As for stopping and reversing the sun from moving around the Earth, God could not stop it because it doesn't do it. It's not a matter of how powerful God is or His capabilities, it's a matter of he can't stop something that doesn't happen. Similarly, while an all-powerful God could stop the rotation of the Earth, while compensating for inertia etc etc to make it appear as if the sun stopped or reversed, but again...that's not how it was described, so again, I am correct that it could not happen as described. The description was as if the sun went around the Earth, which it does not.

 

[PostmodernProph]

A cubit was the length from a person's elbow to their fingertips, so it was a subjective unit of measurement to begin with.

wait.....you mean everyone's forearm isn't the same length?.....obviously we'll have to rethink salvation!.......

That was exactly my point, are you dense?

nope....just hopelessly sarcastic.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

If you don't believe that god plopped down Adam fully formed and made Eve out of his rib, then you're not a Christian. Kinda simple really.

and has science proven otherwise?.....

Science hasn't proved that, so,it can't be a scientific fact. See how that works?

I have.....but you believe science has proven something contradictory.....do you see why it hasn't worked?....

 

[PostmodernProph]

There are far too many examples of macro-evolutions to even list and more are discovered everyday.

demonstrate one......preferrably, demonstrate the simplest....a single celled organism evolving into a multicelled organism.....if you can't do that, certainly you can't demonstrate a single celled organism evolving into a human being......

 

[PostmodernProph]

Riddle me this, if the scientific accuracy of the Bible, (inherent, ineffable, infallible Word of God and all that) can't be trusted to get junior high math right, why in the world should I be expected to just throw away the four centuries of scientific work we've done in favor of said Bible?

perhaps because anyone with a lick of intelligence would realize that the Bible wasn't written to teach you mathematics.....now again, what scientific work of the last four centuries do you have to throw away to believe in what the Bible says about God, you, and your relationship?......

Given that one of the core disciplines of Science is Mathematics you would have to drop Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Astronomy, Geology, Engineering, etc, etc.

FYI the bible not only fails at Pi, it also fails basic counting and addition sums.

lol.....dude....I do not have to reject the value of Pi to be a Christian......apparently you had to reject logic to become an atheist.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Yes!

as I recall, the shrubbery eaten by dinosaurs went extinct at the same time the dinosaurs did.....when did the shrubs and trees of the dry savannas that giraffes eat evolve?.....

Please provide credible substantiation that the "shrubbery eaten by dinosaurs went extinct at the same time the dinosaurs did".

well, no......because I really don't give a **** whether it did or not......I'm simply thinking back about the earliest trees and recalling that they weren't birches and ash and honeysuckle.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

That mankind was 'created in the image of God' and therefore uniquely immune to the vagaries of evolution.

I would say you have that right....did you figure it out all by yourself?.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

I disagree. What I have shown is that those particular instances cannot have occurred exactly as described. It does not preclude them being embellished stories and it doesn't speak at all as to any kind of divine inspiration. Additionally, it is my understanding that Judaism has never insisted on a strictly literal interpretation of the Bible, and neither has the Catholic or other ancient churches. It was only with the creation of Evangelical, Charismatic, and Pentecostal churches that literalism became an issue. As far as I know, only the so-called "Fundamentalist" Christian churches and "Fundamentalist" Muslim groups adhere to literalism in the Creation story.

If you don't believe that god plopped down Adam fully formed and made Eve out of his rib, then you're not a Christian. Kinda simple really.

If you don't wear bunny ears on alternative Thursdays, then you're not a human being.

bastard!.....it's Wednesday.....I'm starting my own church!........

 

[PostmodernProph]

You mean by " Creationists", those who know that "God" created the whole universe. So non-creationists are -by def- agnostics or atheists ?!

Hardly. I am a Christian and I believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. But I am not a literalist nor an absolutist.

I know that the Bible is a book of great inspiration and spirituality. It is also a book of parable. It is also a chronicle of God's actions and interactions with mankind. The Bible is also filled with stories of sex, war, violence, comedy, drama, poetry and love. But the Bible is not a textbook for scientific understanding. It is not a geology text nor an astronomy text, nor a Biology text. Those scientific pursuits are not driven by the writings in the Bible.

I don't understand that absolutist attitude among Creationists. It's as ridiculous as "you're either with us or against us". Evolution does not refute the existence of God. It only refutes the mythology set forth in Genesis.

If you don't believe genesis, you're not a Christian, it's that simple.

no, you're that simple......

 

[PostmodernProph]

What I have shown is that those particular instances cannot have occurred exactly as described.

There is an error in your logic. You are relying on your intelligence. Your 10% of active brain knowledge.

God's thoughts and ways are far above our own. He can make things occur exactly as described. He is not working with limited understanding like you and I are. For instance, He created dimensions long ago, and then went on to describe their properties. We just now found them, and have no idea about their properties.

He also makes deformed babies, disease, cancer, Ebola...

I'm pretty sure people make deformed babies.....the only baby he's claimed to have a hand in was Jesus......

 

[PostmodernProph]

Riddle me this, if the scientific accuracy of the Bible, (inherent, ineffable, infallible Word of God and all that) can't be trusted to get junior high math right, why in the world should I be expected to just throw away the four centuries of scientific work we've done in favor of said Bible?

perhaps because anyone with a lick of intelligence would realize that the Bible wasn't written to teach you mathematics.....now again, what scientific work of the last four centuries do you have to throw away to believe in what the Bible says about God, you, and your relationship?......

We've been having this exact same conversation since 1543 when Copernicus had an idea that the Earth wasn't the center of Creation. The Bible is many things, but it's not a science text. But it also can't be wrong, can't be inaccurate, can't be open to interpretation because if it is anything but the literal truth direct from God, then what?

The evolution debate isn't about unanswered questions about transitional fossils and genetic markers and carbon dating methods. It's about if we weren't actually created in the Garden of Eden, then what else do we have to reconsider? If humans really are descended from a common ancestor with apes, then are we really touched by God or is there some bit of human dignity that we are just imagining? It comes down to small minded people uncomfortable with having to deal with those questions and convincing people who are scientifically illiterate that the science is just plain wrong.

we may be having the same conversation, but this time its YOU instead of the church fathers that is claiming the Bible is supposed to be taken as an authority on the science of mathematics or biology.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Remember geometry in 9th grade? You might have been exposed to the formula for circumference of a circle. C=2πr

Turns out that math in the Bible is slightly different. Seems Solomon was building some stuff for God's Temple, including big bowl thing. The Bible very clearly says the diameter of this bowl thing was "ten cubits from the one brim to the other" but the circumference of this big bowl thing was "and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." (1 Kings 7:23)

If the diameter is 10 cubits, that means the radius is 5 cubits (because 1 diameter is equal to 2 radii. 10/2=5). So using our formula, we can plug in the values we have. So

C=2*π*5
So our answer is 31.416 cubits

Wait a minute. Our answer is 31.416 cubits, but the Bible answer is 30.0 cubits exactly.

What gives? Is the Bible wrong or is math? If it's the literal truth, is rounding down consistent with every word being the Inherent and Ineffable Word of God?

So maybe a talking ass is wiser than me, but at least I can still do junior high math.

A cubit was the length from a person's elbow to their fingertips, so it was a subjective unit of measurement to begin with.

Well, since it doesn't say that bowl was 10 Bob cubits in diameter and 30 Joe cubits in circumference, the only logical conclusion is that the unit of measurement when describing that bowl was used throughout the entire process.

The mental gymnastics some people use to defend the indefensible is astonishing. Maybe, just maybe, the Bible is inaccurate in describing that bowl.

again, who gives a ****.....do you think you can win this argument by claiming the authenticity of the Bible hinges on whether they rounded off the circumference of a circle to 30 feet instead of 31.74?......why not complain that they "rounded off" the time Jesus spent in hell to three days instead of just being a night, a day and a morning.....wtf, couldn't have have spent a full 72 hours like everyone else who died and came back?......