Evolution: The Big Hoax of lefts

[Marion Morrison]

Probably only poor educated folks and liberals still believe in fairy-tale called 'Evolution', one of the biggest liberal lies in human history.Why liberals want to abolish God?Because only God can stop their insane LGBT, climate protection, genderism, satanism, NWO, white genocide, communism, feminism and other agendas.
Everywhere getting power liberals have fought against God.The Satan own people!

The great collection of proofs below destroys completely the Evolution-Lie

EVOLUTION: The Big Hoax!

I take it they're not teaching evolution in Russia anymore?

 

[LittleNipper]

Well, it would appear that astronomers seemed to have observed at least one star become a black hole; however, no stars have ever been observed being born... Susceptibility to diseases is likely the result of weakening of the gene pool ---- decay...

Stars are born all the time as observed by those same astronomers. You're also wrong about disease. Disease is gene warfare and is best studied using the ToE. It is not a case of decay.

This apparently is not the case! Please note: Has anyone ever seen a star "turn on"? (Beginner) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

You are OK saying astronomers observed a star become a black hole since that supports your narrative but reject star birth since it doesn't fit that narrative. Both processes likely take thousands or even millions of years so neither has ever been directly observed. Dishonesty?

Apparently not! Astronomers have witnessed a never-before-seen type of supernova

 

[alang1216]

I understand the evidence, but when you trace it back to the beginning, it starts to fall apart. For example, many people believe in the singularity, that the big bang started as a microscopic point in the universe, and expanded from there. Where I start to question that is, how was it that something so small contained enough matter to create all the planets, stars, moons, asteroids etc.

As Einstein found, E=MC**2 or matter and energy are the same. The BB was an inflation of that energy that, when sufficiently cooled, 'froze' into matter.

Logic would say that something existed before the universe began. When you ponder that, then you have to ask, where did that something come from? Did it just always exist? There had to have been a beginning somewhere, sometime.

Why is it that theists have no trouble believing in an eternal God but insist the universe had to have a beginning?

 

[alang1216]

You are OK saying astronomers observed a star become a black hole since that supports your narrative but reject star birth since it doesn't fit that narrative. Both processes likely take thousands or even millions of years so neither has ever been directly observed. Dishonesty?

Apparently not! Astronomers have witnessed a never-before-seen type of supernova

No one has ever witnessed a black hole so we can only speculate what becomes of the star after the supernova.

 

[Hollie]

Well, it would appear that astronomers seemed to have observed at least one star become a black hole; however, no stars have ever been observed being born... Susceptibility to diseases is likely the result of weakening of the gene pool ---- decay...

Stars are born all the time as observed by those same astronomers. You're also wrong about disease. Disease is gene warfare and is best studied using the ToE. It is not a case of decay.

This apparently is not the case! Please note: Has anyone ever seen a star "turn on"? (Beginner) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

You are OK saying astronomers observed a star become a black hole since that supports your narrative but reject star birth since it doesn't fit that narrative. Both processes likely take thousands or even millions of years so neither has ever been directly observed. Dishonesty?

Apparently not! Astronomers have witnessed a never-before-seen type of supernova

What's your opinion regarding the article you linked to?

I found it predictable that it was astronomers publishing their findings in a peer reviewed journal.

Are you surprised that the research was not performed by any of the quack fundamentalist ministries?

Do any of the fundamentalist ministries do any research at all? I know the answer but what are you thoughts?

 

[ThisIsMe]

I understand the evidence, but when you trace it back to the beginning, it starts to fall apart. For example, many people believe in the singularity, that the big bang started as a microscopic point in the universe, and expanded from there. Where I start to question that is, how was it that something so small contained enough matter to create all the planets, stars, moons, asteroids etc.

As Einstein found, E=MC**2 or matter and energy are the same. The BB was an inflation of that energy that, when sufficiently cooled, 'froze' into matter.

Logic would say that something existed before the universe began. When you ponder that, then you have to ask, where did that something come from? Did it just always exist? There had to have been a beginning somewhere, sometime.

Why is it that theists have no trouble believing in an eternal God but insist the universe had to have a beginning?

Well, that's kind of my point. Big bang advocates will deny God, but believe that before the universe, there was nothing, no existence, and from that non existence, the universe exploded into being. It just doesn't make sense.

There are some who say that there was something, some kind of energy. But again, it's just as plausible to say that the universe has always existed as it is to say that God has always existed.

My point was, it takes faith to believe either way.

 

[alang1216]

Well, that's kind of my point. Big bang advocates will deny God, but believe that before the universe, there was nothing, no existence, and from that non existence, the universe exploded into being. It just doesn't make sense.

There are some who say that there was something, some kind of energy. But again, it's just as plausible to say that the universe has always existed as it is to say that God has always existed.

My point was, it takes faith to believe either way.

Not really, to believe your eyes is easy, to believe something that contradicts the evidence, now that takes faith.

 

[LittleNipper]

Well, it would appear that astronomers seemed to have observed at least one star become a black hole; however, no stars have ever been observed being born... Susceptibility to diseases is likely the result of weakening of the gene pool ---- decay...

Stars are born all the time as observed by those same astronomers. You're also wrong about disease. Disease is gene warfare and is best studied using the ToE. It is not a case of decay.

This apparently is not the case! Please note: Has anyone ever seen a star "turn on"? (Beginner) - Curious About Astronomy? Ask an Astronomer

You are OK saying astronomers observed a star become a black hole since that supports your narrative but reject star birth since it doesn't fit that narrative. Both processes likely take thousands or even millions of years so neither has ever been directly observed. Dishonesty?

Apparently not! Astronomers have witnessed a never-before-seen type of supernova

What's your opinion regarding the article you linked to?

I found it predictable that it was astronomers publishing their findings in a peer reviewed journal.

Are you surprised that the research was not performed by any of the quack fundamentalist ministries?

Do any of the fundamentalist ministries do any research at all? I know the answer but what are you thoughts?

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

 

[alang1216]

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

 

[LittleNipper]

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

 

[Hollie]

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

You may choose to live your life under the burden that you are evil, base and sinful but whatever for. Such an existence carries with it a host of negative socio-psycho connotations.

Regarding your link to AIG, It’s obvious that AIG does no research. Worse than that;

Statement of Faith

Section 2: Basics

· The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

There’s more but it just gets worse.

The first thing we must understand is that faith, in and of itself, is not a pathway to access knowledge. Since the criteria of evidence and proof is not necessary under the constructs of faith (i.e., things are to be believed in spite of proof or evidence), there are no ways to apply a standard to the claim asserted. Under the guidelines of faith, there is nothing to separate the belief in the gods of ancient Rome or Greece, for instance, from the gods of modern society. Each statement of belief carries the same level of validity, i.e., none.

Faith cannot be used as a tool to access knowledge because it is random. Faith-based assertions carry validity (sic) not because there is any criteria to back them up, but because a group of people deem it so, and by definition, faith asks that one does not question validity. If one is questioning their faith, it is considered that they are also losing their faith, not strengthening it.

And yes, the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras was among the first to propose the sphericity of the Earth in the 6th century BC, <---- before the invention of Christianity), using among his proofs how the sail of a ship could be observed to disappear over the curvature of the Earth.

Plato also espoused a spherical Earth in the Phaedra, and his student Aristotle gave his reasoning in his book On the Heavens in 350 BC. His proof rested on the facts that persons living in southern lands see southern constellations higher above the horizon than those living in northern lands, that the shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and that since objects fall to Earth towards its center means that if it were constructed of small bits of matter originally, these parts would naturally settle into a spherical shape. His demonstration was so compelling that a spherical Earth was the central assumption of all subsequent philosophers of the Classical era. He also used the curved phases of the moon to argue that the Moon must also be a sphere like the Earth.


In fact, the global nature of the earth was clearly demonstrated by Eratothenes 2,200 years ago (by comparing shadow lengths in Alexandria and Syene at high noon).

 

[ThisIsMe]

Well, that's kind of my point. Big bang advocates will deny God, but believe that before the universe, there was nothing, no existence, and from that non existence, the universe exploded into being. It just doesn't make sense.

There are some who say that there was something, some kind of energy. But again, it's just as plausible to say that the universe has always existed as it is to say that God has always existed.

My point was, it takes faith to believe either way.

Not really, to believe your eyes is easy, to believe something that contradicts the evidence, now that takes faith.

Again, we circle back to "evidence". There is no real way to know why things work the way they do. Science shows you something and they say "that's because of the big bang", but nobody really knows what happened when the universe began.

Sure, it "could be" because of big bang, but for science to point at everything and say "big bang", is disingenuous. I could say the reason why the galaxies are moving apart is because God made them do that. How is my theory any less plausible than the other?

As far as what you can see, again, all the evidence is relative to a certain point of view. One thing we know for certain is, we dont know for certain. I've yet to see anything materialize out of thin air, which is what science wants people to believe what happened millions of years ago. Nobody has seen what happened when the universe began, we only see what the universe has become, and nobody can say for certain how it got from there to here.

Obviously, these are only my own opinions, and just how I view things, doesnt mean I'm right, or that you are wrong. It just means we are really pretty much in the same place, as far as knowledge of the origins of the universe goes. [emoji4]

 

[LittleNipper]

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

You may choose to live your life under the burden that you are evil, base and sinful but whatever for. Such an existence carries with it a host of negative socio-psycho connotations.

Regarding your link to AIG, It’s obvious that AIG does no research. Worse than that;

Statement of Faith

Section 2: Basics

· The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

There’s more but it just gets worse.

The first thing we must understand is that faith, in and of itself, is not a pathway to access knowledge. Since the criteria of evidence and proof is not necessary under the constructs of faith (i.e., things are to be believed in spite of proof or evidence), there are no ways to apply a standard to the claim asserted. Under the guidelines of faith, there is nothing to separate the belief in the gods of ancient Rome or Greece, for instance, from the gods of modern society. Each statement of belief carries the same level of validity, i.e., none.

Faith cannot be used as a tool to access knowledge because it is random. Faith-based assertions carry validity (sic) not because there is any criteria to back them up, but because a group of people deem it so, and by definition, faith asks that one does not question validity. If one is questioning their faith, it is considered that they are also losing their faith, not strengthening it.

And yes, the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras was among the first to propose the sphericity of the Earth in the 6th century BC, <---- before the invention of Christianity), using among his proofs how the sail of a ship could be observed to disappear over the curvature of the Earth.

Plato also espoused a spherical Earth in the Phaedra, and his student Aristotle gave his reasoning in his book On the Heavens in 350 BC. His proof rested on the facts that persons living in southern lands see southern constellations higher above the horizon than those living in northern lands, that the shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and that since objects fall to Earth towards its center means that if it were constructed of small bits of matter originally, these parts would naturally settle into a spherical shape. His demonstration was so compelling that a spherical Earth was the central assumption of all subsequent philosophers of the Classical era. He also used the curved phases of the moon to argue that the Moon must also be a sphere like the Earth.


In fact, the global nature of the earth was clearly demonstrated by Eratothenes 2,200 years ago (by comparing shadow lengths in Alexandria and Syene at high noon).

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

 

[Hollie]

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

You may choose to live your life under the burden that you are evil, base and sinful but whatever for. Such an existence carries with it a host of negative socio-psycho connotations.

Regarding your link to AIG, It’s obvious that AIG does no research. Worse than that;

Statement of Faith

Section 2: Basics

· The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

There’s more but it just gets worse.

The first thing we must understand is that faith, in and of itself, is not a pathway to access knowledge. Since the criteria of evidence and proof is not necessary under the constructs of faith (i.e., things are to be believed in spite of proof or evidence), there are no ways to apply a standard to the claim asserted. Under the guidelines of faith, there is nothing to separate the belief in the gods of ancient Rome or Greece, for instance, from the gods of modern society. Each statement of belief carries the same level of validity, i.e., none.

Faith cannot be used as a tool to access knowledge because it is random. Faith-based assertions carry validity (sic) not because there is any criteria to back them up, but because a group of people deem it so, and by definition, faith asks that one does not question validity. If one is questioning their faith, it is considered that they are also losing their faith, not strengthening it.

And yes, the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras was among the first to propose the sphericity of the Earth in the 6th century BC, <---- before the invention of Christianity), using among his proofs how the sail of a ship could be observed to disappear over the curvature of the Earth.

Plato also espoused a spherical Earth in the Phaedra, and his student Aristotle gave his reasoning in his book On the Heavens in 350 BC. His proof rested on the facts that persons living in southern lands see southern constellations higher above the horizon than those living in northern lands, that the shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and that since objects fall to Earth towards its center means that if it were constructed of small bits of matter originally, these parts would naturally settle into a spherical shape. His demonstration was so compelling that a spherical Earth was the central assumption of all subsequent philosophers of the Classical era. He also used the curved phases of the moon to argue that the Moon must also be a sphere like the Earth.


In fact, the global nature of the earth was clearly demonstrated by Eratothenes 2,200 years ago (by comparing shadow lengths in Alexandria and Syene at high noon).

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

“Saint Nip”?

 

[alang1216]

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

I may be off topic but this mindset has always surprised me. I don't believe in heaven or hell so I have no fear of either. However for someone who does believe in them, I would think there must always be some doubt as to God's will. So many people have spoken in his name how can any believer know what his criteria for heaven are? I'm sure your faith is strong but I'd worry about getting to the pearly gates and finding Mohammad there instead of St. Peter.

 

[LittleNipper]

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

I may be off topic but this mindset has always surprised me. I don't believe in heaven or hell so I have no fear of either. However for someone who does believe in them, I would think there must always be some doubt as to God's will. So many people have spoken in his name how can any believer know what his criteria for heaven are? I'm sure your faith is strong but I'd worry about getting to the pearly gates and finding Mohammad there instead of St. Peter.

Why don't you believe in heaven or hell? God gave me the Bible, and Jesus the Messiah reaffirmed what it has to say is true. Mohammad came after the Messiah, and never claimed to be returning. Mohammad never arose from the dead. Just because someone doesn't believe in something doesn't preclude that individual from the dire consequences of its reality. For years people had no reason to believe in micro-organisms and yet they suffered the undeniable consequences of their existence.

 

[LittleNipper]

Creationists all accept that the Universe is in bondage to SIN. And yes, Creationists are engaged in scientific research. For your perusal: Astronomy

"Curiously, many astronomy textbooks credit Pythagoras (c. 570–500 B.C.) with being the first person to assert that the earth is round. However, Isaiah is generally acknowledged to have been written in the 700s B.C."

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

You may choose to live your life under the burden that you are evil, base and sinful but whatever for. Such an existence carries with it a host of negative socio-psycho connotations.

Regarding your link to AIG, It’s obvious that AIG does no research. Worse than that;

Statement of Faith

Section 2: Basics

· The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

There’s more but it just gets worse.

The first thing we must understand is that faith, in and of itself, is not a pathway to access knowledge. Since the criteria of evidence and proof is not necessary under the constructs of faith (i.e., things are to be believed in spite of proof or evidence), there are no ways to apply a standard to the claim asserted. Under the guidelines of faith, there is nothing to separate the belief in the gods of ancient Rome or Greece, for instance, from the gods of modern society. Each statement of belief carries the same level of validity, i.e., none.

Faith cannot be used as a tool to access knowledge because it is random. Faith-based assertions carry validity (sic) not because there is any criteria to back them up, but because a group of people deem it so, and by definition, faith asks that one does not question validity. If one is questioning their faith, it is considered that they are also losing their faith, not strengthening it.

And yes, the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras was among the first to propose the sphericity of the Earth in the 6th century BC, <---- before the invention of Christianity), using among his proofs how the sail of a ship could be observed to disappear over the curvature of the Earth.

Plato also espoused a spherical Earth in the Phaedra, and his student Aristotle gave his reasoning in his book On the Heavens in 350 BC. His proof rested on the facts that persons living in southern lands see southern constellations higher above the horizon than those living in northern lands, that the shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and that since objects fall to Earth towards its center means that if it were constructed of small bits of matter originally, these parts would naturally settle into a spherical shape. His demonstration was so compelling that a spherical Earth was the central assumption of all subsequent philosophers of the Classical era. He also used the curved phases of the moon to argue that the Moon must also be a sphere like the Earth.


In fact, the global nature of the earth was clearly demonstrated by Eratothenes 2,200 years ago (by comparing shadow lengths in Alexandria and Syene at high noon).

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

“Saint Nip”?

Actually, every saved believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is a SAINT. One doesn't need Roman Catholic affirmation.

 

[Hollie]

Sin is not a scientific concept and Isaiah's brief description is hardly a scientific treatise on par with Pythagoras who actually measured the earth.

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

You may choose to live your life under the burden that you are evil, base and sinful but whatever for. Such an existence carries with it a host of negative socio-psycho connotations.

Regarding your link to AIG, It’s obvious that AIG does no research. Worse than that;

Statement of Faith

Section 2: Basics

· The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

There’s more but it just gets worse.

The first thing we must understand is that faith, in and of itself, is not a pathway to access knowledge. Since the criteria of evidence and proof is not necessary under the constructs of faith (i.e., things are to be believed in spite of proof or evidence), there are no ways to apply a standard to the claim asserted. Under the guidelines of faith, there is nothing to separate the belief in the gods of ancient Rome or Greece, for instance, from the gods of modern society. Each statement of belief carries the same level of validity, i.e., none.

Faith cannot be used as a tool to access knowledge because it is random. Faith-based assertions carry validity (sic) not because there is any criteria to back them up, but because a group of people deem it so, and by definition, faith asks that one does not question validity. If one is questioning their faith, it is considered that they are also losing their faith, not strengthening it.

And yes, the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras was among the first to propose the sphericity of the Earth in the 6th century BC, <---- before the invention of Christianity), using among his proofs how the sail of a ship could be observed to disappear over the curvature of the Earth.

Plato also espoused a spherical Earth in the Phaedra, and his student Aristotle gave his reasoning in his book On the Heavens in 350 BC. His proof rested on the facts that persons living in southern lands see southern constellations higher above the horizon than those living in northern lands, that the shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and that since objects fall to Earth towards its center means that if it were constructed of small bits of matter originally, these parts would naturally settle into a spherical shape. His demonstration was so compelling that a spherical Earth was the central assumption of all subsequent philosophers of the Classical era. He also used the curved phases of the moon to argue that the Moon must also be a sphere like the Earth.


In fact, the global nature of the earth was clearly demonstrated by Eratothenes 2,200 years ago (by comparing shadow lengths in Alexandria and Syene at high noon).

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

“Saint Nip”?

Actually, every saved believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is a SAINT. One doesn't need Roman Catholic affirmation.

I can understand you want to believe that as it addresses your fear of death and the unknown. I have to add however that it was men who wrote the bibles and there is no indication that any of them had any direct communications with any of the gods.

All of your appeals to the gods are nothing but pure assertion by a theist. You're certainly entitled to make unsupported claims, but it is not any kind of an argument. It is purely an assertion and there are equally-"authoritative" assertions by other religious entities that are just as "viable" as yours. The only standard by which we can discern the truth is evidence, so please produce evidence to support A) your assertion and B) your assertion is true but the Hindu one for instance is not.

 

[alang1216]

Why don't you believe in heaven or hell? God gave me the Bible, and Jesus the Messiah reaffirmed what it has to say is true.

I believe in evolution, and not just biological evolution. I think just about everything evolves, micro-organisms, people, cultures, religions, etc. What you call Christianity evolved over the centuries after Jesus' death by the standard evolutionary forces, conflict, competition, and chance, and what survived (the fittest?) is what we call Christianity. I doubt Jesus would approve of what Christianity has become. Not that there is anything wrong or evil about it, it is just not what Jesus envisioned as his legacy. Just my $0.02.

 

[LittleNipper]

Have you ever done a study regarding sin? Anything can be investigated. Isaiah noted that the Earth is spherical --- that is what was under consideration.
According to Wikipedia --- Eratosthenes of Cyrene . (276 BC – c. 195/194 BC) was a Greek mathematician, geographer, poet, astronomer, and music theorist. He was a man of learning, becoming the chief librarian at the Library of Alexandria. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology used today.

He is best known for being the first person to calculate the circumference of the Earth, which he did by comparing angles of the mid-day Sun at two places a known North-South distance apart.His calculation was remarkably accurate. He was also the first to calculate the tilt of the Earth's axis, again with remarkable accuracy. Additionally, he may have accurately calculated the distance from the Earth to the Sun and invented the leap day. He created the first map of the world, incorporating parallels and meridians based on the available geographic knowledge of his era.

You may choose to live your life under the burden that you are evil, base and sinful but whatever for. Such an existence carries with it a host of negative socio-psycho connotations.

Regarding your link to AIG, It’s obvious that AIG does no research. Worse than that;

Statement of Faith

Section 2: Basics

· The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.

There’s more but it just gets worse.

The first thing we must understand is that faith, in and of itself, is not a pathway to access knowledge. Since the criteria of evidence and proof is not necessary under the constructs of faith (i.e., things are to be believed in spite of proof or evidence), there are no ways to apply a standard to the claim asserted. Under the guidelines of faith, there is nothing to separate the belief in the gods of ancient Rome or Greece, for instance, from the gods of modern society. Each statement of belief carries the same level of validity, i.e., none.

Faith cannot be used as a tool to access knowledge because it is random. Faith-based assertions carry validity (sic) not because there is any criteria to back them up, but because a group of people deem it so, and by definition, faith asks that one does not question validity. If one is questioning their faith, it is considered that they are also losing their faith, not strengthening it.

And yes, the ancient Greek philosopher Pythagoras was among the first to propose the sphericity of the Earth in the 6th century BC, <---- before the invention of Christianity), using among his proofs how the sail of a ship could be observed to disappear over the curvature of the Earth.

Plato also espoused a spherical Earth in the Phaedra, and his student Aristotle gave his reasoning in his book On the Heavens in 350 BC. His proof rested on the facts that persons living in southern lands see southern constellations higher above the horizon than those living in northern lands, that the shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and that since objects fall to Earth towards its center means that if it were constructed of small bits of matter originally, these parts would naturally settle into a spherical shape. His demonstration was so compelling that a spherical Earth was the central assumption of all subsequent philosophers of the Classical era. He also used the curved phases of the moon to argue that the Moon must also be a sphere like the Earth.


In fact, the global nature of the earth was clearly demonstrated by Eratothenes 2,200 years ago (by comparing shadow lengths in Alexandria and Syene at high noon).

Fortunately, I'm a saved saint and have no fear of sin keeping me out of heaven. I know where I'm headed when this life is over, and this offers freedom from fear and a relief from being anxious.

“Saint Nip”?

Actually, every saved believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is a SAINT. One doesn't need Roman Catholic affirmation.

I can understand you want to believe that as it addresses your fear of death and the unknown. I have to add however that it was men who wrote the bibles and there is no indication that any of them had any direct communications with any of the gods.

All of your appeals to the gods are nothing but pure assertion by a theist. You're certainly entitled to make unsupported claims, but it is not any kind of an argument. It is purely an assertion and there are equally-"authoritative" assertions by other religious entities that are just as "viable" as yours. The only standard by which we can discern the truth is evidence, so please produce evidence to support A) your assertion and B) your assertion is true but the Hindu one for instance is not.

I can provided you with 2 proofs right off the bat. One being the Jews. The second being Jesus. They both are part of the fabric of history. And they both point towards eternity. Christian Fundamentalism is just that ---- a return to the principles of the New Testament.