Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have read the bible. How do you think I found out about the genealogy? Stop stalling and show me the proof that the Hebrews were white and not Black. I already showed you just a little of the proof they were Black. You want to go up against me mention for mention in the bible?And you refuse to read the Bible and discover how wrong you are.You didnt spend 30 years studying your history. The Hebrews were Black people and youre not Black. Please show me where they were white people.Start studying and drop the horseshit.So if the Talmud is factual then you can only agree that Genesis is a African creation story. All you have to do is follow the genealogy of the people involved along with the various stories of God turning people white as punishment. Remember Hams children settled Egypt and the only difference people could see between the Hebrews and the Egyptians was in their attire. There is a reason the Pharaoh couldn't spot the Hebrew child he wanted to kill living in his own house. Too many points in the Talamud where Hebrews were mistaken as Egyptians.The Talmus is factual.So then you must be claiming the Talamud is racist? You can read in Genesis who populated what areas. Why dont you just show us something that supports your claim.
Regardless of the creation story regarding the people of Cush, the Talmud, as always, has great admiration for the moral character of the Cushites as individuals, if not as a people.
It's obvious the Prophets, via God's message, relate that God is not happy with their overall society.
But I'm sure you have some obscure Google Book fragment that says the Cushites invented the Internet.
I didn't spend over 30 years of my life studying my history to stop and listen to a sound byte moron like you.
But you are always quick to quote a verse when it aligns with your agenda.
The descendants of Cham not only weren't Jews, some of them ventured to Africa and had no contact with the rest of civilization until the Romans came and found...swamps.
He stated that science does not state that there is no God, that the most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God. Him saying he never said there was no God and that I want my book to be perfectly factual. Where did he get that from? I never compared science to the whole bible, just the creation of man. The theory of evolution being responsible for the creation of life is not scientifically proven till this day.My book? I believe in god but I don't believe every story in the bible. So your assumption of me wanting my book to be completely factual is just out of anger and no actual content. He could of guided evolution. But you really believe that we evolved from an microscopic organism? How would we of survived? Were we developing in an egg like incubation chamber acting as a womb feeding us nutrition and protecting us from scavengers? Or eventually just turn into a new born and learned to fend and feed for ourselves?Science does not say there is no God. The most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God.
It is you that demands that one choose. I am not a Christian, but I do not say that there is absolutely no God. Why could God not have guided evolution? Why? Maybe because you want YOUR book to be perfectly factual?
WinterBorn is one of the most reasonable and well informed posters here. I don't see any evidence of anger in his post and I almost agree with him on this.
While its true that, to my knowledge, "there is no quantifiable evidence of God", I cannot find a way to believe a god exists.
Besides which, the question of which god? There are a lot to choose from and christianity was lifted, almost 100%, from other religions.
I believe completely and absolutely in evolution in that there is simply no other way the earth/known universe could be as it is. Given the givens - the makeup of the atmosphere, the relationship of dark and light, the ingredients that became our planet, and so much more - there is no other way it could have happened.
"How would we of [sic] survived?"
An example: I lived in the desert southwest for more than 25 years and would often hear people observe that its just amazing that the enormous saguaro "survived" in such harsh and inhospitable conditions.
In reality, the opposite is true. It could not survive any place else and neither could/can we.
IMO, part of what makes the case for evolution is simply that we did not just arrive here and decide to stay. You ask what came first? The chicken or the egg.
Same question for you: Which came first? The planet or it's inhabitants?
The photo is in case you don't know what a saguaro is. I picked this photos because of the "cristate" crown. Very cool looking, rare and no one is really sure how it happens.
He stated that science does not state that there is no God, that the most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God. Him saying he never said there was no God and that I want my book to be perfectly factual. Where did he get that from? I never compared science to the whole bible, just the creation of man. The theory of evolution being responsible for the creation of life is not scientifically proven till this day.My book? I believe in god but I don't believe every story in the bible. So your assumption of me wanting my book to be completely factual is just out of anger and no actual content. He could of guided evolution. But you really believe that we evolved from an microscopic organism? How would we of survived? Were we developing in an egg like incubation chamber acting as a womb feeding us nutrition and protecting us from scavengers? Or eventually just turn into a new born and learned to fend and feed for ourselves?Science does not say there is no God. The most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God.
It is you that demands that one choose. I am not a Christian, but I do not say that there is absolutely no God. Why could God not have guided evolution? Why? Maybe because you want YOUR book to be perfectly factual?
WinterBorn is one of the most reasonable and well informed posters here. I don't see any evidence of anger in his post and I almost agree with him on this.
While its true that, to my knowledge, "there is no quantifiable evidence of God", I cannot find a way to believe a god exists.
Besides which, the question of which god? There are a lot to choose from and christianity was lifted, almost 100%, from other religions.
I believe completely and absolutely in evolution in that there is simply no other way the earth/known universe could be as it is. Given the givens - the makeup of the atmosphere, the relationship of dark and light, the ingredients that became our planet, and so much more - there is no other way it could have happened.
"How would we of [sic] survived?"
An example: I lived in the desert southwest for more than 25 years and would often hear people observe that its just amazing that the enormous saguaro "survived" in such harsh and inhospitable conditions.
In reality, the opposite is true. It could not survive any place else and neither could/can we.
IMO, part of what makes the case for evolution is simply that we did not just arrive here and decide to stay. You ask what came first? The chicken or the egg.
Same question for you: Which came first? The planet or it's inhabitants?
The photo is in case you don't know what a saguaro is. I picked this photos because of the "cristate" crown. Very cool looking, rare and no one is really sure how it happens.
How are my questions illogical? My questions aren't logical questions that one would want to know, to better understand? They say we evolved from a single cell, ok that's cool, but then what?
How did new born babies survive without being able to walk or fend of predators? Wouldn't something higher in the food chain just wipe us out? How did they find food and protection from the elements?
What acted as a womb and provided nourishments and maintained the fetus through out the process?
You are entitled to what you think and so is everybody else. But Everyone is missing my point. After the single cell started to evolve what happened next? If you can answer any of my questions or prove anything to me be my quest.
You not believing in God is your choice, but I do. Your question what came first the planet or its inhabitants? is a good one if you believe the theory of evolution was responsible for our creation. But what created the Earth? And what created whatever created the earth? and so on. So actually the earth is the chicken and it produced life. The planet was just placed here how couldn't the chicken be? Until it can be scientifically proven you cant say what actually happened you can only believe what you think happened. To me until its proven God creating man from soil sounds no more crazier then the theory of evolution created human life.
I am not saying that evolution doesn't exist I'm saying I don't believe it created the first human life.
Look up the Ramban on how Adam was a Single Cell organism.I will admit my knowledge on Philosophy is limited. Just recently sparked an interest in it. Why do you think I need to study philosophy first, before I play with science and religion? Are you saying you never thought of it yourself? Are you saying my questions are not logical enough? Can you answer or prove any of my logical questions? Are you saying my philosophical method is wrong? Can you present a better one? Are you saying I lack understanding of religion and science, and that I don't know enough about philosophy to be curious and have a better understanding how human life was first created? What is the issue with my thinking???You need to study philosophy first, before you play with science or religion.What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.
Isn't philosophy a search for a general understanding by questioning critical discussions and rational argument? Pursuit of wisdom? The study of general and fundamental problems such as EXISTENCE, knowledge, values, reason, mind and language? Science is the concerted human effort to understand, or understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of understanding. Religion is about practices and customs.
So based on my thread, you think I need to study philosophy? My search for understanding how life may have been created, is questionable to you? My method of trying to gain knowledge to help me understand the creation of life, by questioning both religion and science, and my beliefs(which basic beliefs and concepts of an individual is philosophy) that God created the first human from the soil, and that the science Theory that we evolved from a single cell organism sounds illogical and irrational to me.
Tell me what is wrong with my thread? Are you saying I am wrong for what I believe? When neither way was ever scientifically proven? Can you tell me the process that happened after the single cell started to evolve? How were humans birthed? How did the survive through infancy having to find food, water, shelter, and fend of predators?
So your telling me that the philosophy is wrong here? My searching for facts on how life began isn't philosophy? I didn't analyze the grounds of concepts be expressing fundamental beliefs?
I have questions through out the thread if you can answer or prove any of them be my guest.
Ok Adam may have been a single cell organism, but he did not evolve over time.Look up the Ramban on how Adam was a Single Cell organism.I will admit my knowledge on Philosophy is limited. Just recently sparked an interest in it. Why do you think I need to study philosophy first, before I play with science and religion? Are you saying you never thought of it yourself? Are you saying my questions are not logical enough? Can you answer or prove any of my logical questions? Are you saying my philosophical method is wrong? Can you present a better one? Are you saying I lack understanding of religion and science, and that I don't know enough about philosophy to be curious and have a better understanding how human life was first created? What is the issue with my thinking???You need to study philosophy first, before you play with science or religion.What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.
Isn't philosophy a search for a general understanding by questioning critical discussions and rational argument? Pursuit of wisdom? The study of general and fundamental problems such as EXISTENCE, knowledge, values, reason, mind and language? Science is the concerted human effort to understand, or understand better, the history of the natural world and how the natural world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of understanding. Religion is about practices and customs.
So based on my thread, you think I need to study philosophy? My search for understanding how life may have been created, is questionable to you? My method of trying to gain knowledge to help me understand the creation of life, by questioning both religion and science, and my beliefs(which basic beliefs and concepts of an individual is philosophy) that God created the first human from the soil, and that the science Theory that we evolved from a single cell organism sounds illogical and irrational to me.
Tell me what is wrong with my thread? Are you saying I am wrong for what I believe? When neither way was ever scientifically proven? Can you tell me the process that happened after the single cell started to evolve? How were humans birthed? How did the survive through infancy having to find food, water, shelter, and fend of predators?
So your telling me that the philosophy is wrong here? My searching for facts on how life began isn't philosophy? I didn't analyze the grounds of concepts be expressing fundamental beliefs?
I have questions through out the thread if you can answer or prove any of them be my guest.
Yes, the Rabbis are hundreds of years ahead of you on this one.
By the way, with all credit, many Greeks and Roman knew about this.
I never said it was fact, I said I believe it over single cell evolving. You just said I was correct, That you can only believe what you think happened, then you say No reason to believe its fact. When did I say it was fact? I said neither were ever scientifically proven, that doesn't mean I said its fact. How am I pretending its fact? All I did was question the science that we evolved from a single cell organism, and argued why I BELIEVE the Bible that God(actual definition of faith) created first human life over science. I asked questions, if anyone can answer them please share.He stated that science does not state that there is no God, that the most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God. Him saying he never said there was no God and that I want my book to be perfectly factual. Where did he get that from? I never compared science to the whole bible, just the creation of man. The theory of evolution being responsible for the creation of life is not scientifically proven till this day.My book? I believe in god but I don't believe every story in the bible. So your assumption of me wanting my book to be completely factual is just out of anger and no actual content. He could of guided evolution. But you really believe that we evolved from an microscopic organism? How would we of survived? Were we developing in an egg like incubation chamber acting as a womb feeding us nutrition and protecting us from scavengers? Or eventually just turn into a new born and learned to fend and feed for ourselves?Science does not say there is no God. The most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God.
It is you that demands that one choose. I am not a Christian, but I do not say that there is absolutely no God. Why could God not have guided evolution? Why? Maybe because you want YOUR book to be perfectly factual?
WinterBorn is one of the most reasonable and well informed posters here. I don't see any evidence of anger in his post and I almost agree with him on this.
While its true that, to my knowledge, "there is no quantifiable evidence of God", I cannot find a way to believe a god exists.
Besides which, the question of which god? There are a lot to choose from and christianity was lifted, almost 100%, from other religions.
I believe completely and absolutely in evolution in that there is simply no other way the earth/known universe could be as it is. Given the givens - the makeup of the atmosphere, the relationship of dark and light, the ingredients that became our planet, and so much more - there is no other way it could have happened.
"How would we of [sic] survived?"
An example: I lived in the desert southwest for more than 25 years and would often hear people observe that its just amazing that the enormous saguaro "survived" in such harsh and inhospitable conditions.
In reality, the opposite is true. It could not survive any place else and neither could/can we.
IMO, part of what makes the case for evolution is simply that we did not just arrive here and decide to stay. You ask what came first? The chicken or the egg.
Same question for you: Which came first? The planet or it's inhabitants?
The photo is in case you don't know what a saguaro is. I picked this photos because of the "cristate" crown. Very cool looking, rare and no one is really sure how it happens.
How are my questions illogical? My questions aren't logical questions that one would want to know, to better understand? They say we evolved from a single cell, ok that's cool, but then what?
How did new born babies survive without being able to walk or fend of predators? Wouldn't something higher in the food chain just wipe us out? How did they find food and protection from the elements?
What acted as a womb and provided nourishments and maintained the fetus through out the process?
You are entitled to what you think and so is everybody else. But Everyone is missing my point. After the single cell started to evolve what happened next? If you can answer any of my questions or prove anything to me be my quest.
You not believing in God is your choice, but I do. Your question what came first the planet or its inhabitants? is a good one if you believe the theory of evolution was responsible for our creation. But what created the Earth? And what created whatever created the earth? and so on. So actually the earth is the chicken and it produced life. The planet was just placed here how couldn't the chicken be? Until it can be scientifically proven you cant say what actually happened you can only believe what you think happened. To me until its proven God creating man from soil sounds no more crazier then the theory of evolution created human life.
I am not saying that evolution doesn't exist I'm saying I don't believe it created the first human life.
I've skipped over most of your posts - For Pete's sake, use some white space, why don't you? - but I did read the last paragraph here.
Theists keep saying this - that our planet was just plopped own here and SHAZAM!! Instant life. However, I have never read or heard of science or lay people saying that. Please post a link to that. Thanks.
You are correct that "Until it can be scientifically proven you cant say what actually happened you can only believe what you think happened".
The exact same is true of what you say you believe.
There is no proof. No reason to believe its fact. That's the very definition of "faith" and you're welcome to it. Just don't pretend its fact.
Each of us have looked at what we believe to be evidence and drawn a conclusion from that.
Man do you have trouble comprehending things? You tell me to send a link that says the planet just plopped here? Again I never said it was fact. Send me link that says the evolving from a single cell organism is how life was created 100% without a doubt proven. I said both are not scientifically proven how is that saying its a fact? Since I believe something means its a fact? No never said it was fact.I never said it was fact, I said I believe it over single cell evolving. You just said I was correct, That you can only believe what you think happened, then you say No reason to believe its fact. When did I say it was fact? I said neither were ever scientifically proven, that doesn't mean I said its fact. How am I pretending its fact? All I did was question the science that we evolved from a single cell organism, and argued why I BELIEVE the Bible that God(actual definition of faith) created first human life over science. I asked questions, if anyone can answer them please share.He stated that science does not state that there is no God, that the most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God. Him saying he never said there was no God and that I want my book to be perfectly factual. Where did he get that from? I never compared science to the whole bible, just the creation of man. The theory of evolution being responsible for the creation of life is not scientifically proven till this day.My book? I believe in god but I don't believe every story in the bible. So your assumption of me wanting my book to be completely factual is just out of anger and no actual content. He could of guided evolution. But you really believe that we evolved from an microscopic organism? How would we of survived? Were we developing in an egg like incubation chamber acting as a womb feeding us nutrition and protecting us from scavengers? Or eventually just turn into a new born and learned to fend and feed for ourselves?Science does not say there is no God. The most it says is that there is no quantifiable evidence of God.
It is you that demands that one choose. I am not a Christian, but I do not say that there is absolutely no God. Why could God not have guided evolution? Why? Maybe because you want YOUR book to be perfectly factual?
WinterBorn is one of the most reasonable and well informed posters here. I don't see any evidence of anger in his post and I almost agree with him on this.
While its true that, to my knowledge, "there is no quantifiable evidence of God", I cannot find a way to believe a god exists.
Besides which, the question of which god? There are a lot to choose from and christianity was lifted, almost 100%, from other religions.
I believe completely and absolutely in evolution in that there is simply no other way the earth/known universe could be as it is. Given the givens - the makeup of the atmosphere, the relationship of dark and light, the ingredients that became our planet, and so much more - there is no other way it could have happened.
"How would we of [sic] survived?"
An example: I lived in the desert southwest for more than 25 years and would often hear people observe that its just amazing that the enormous saguaro "survived" in such harsh and inhospitable conditions.
In reality, the opposite is true. It could not survive any place else and neither could/can we.
IMO, part of what makes the case for evolution is simply that we did not just arrive here and decide to stay. You ask what came first? The chicken or the egg.
Same question for you: Which came first? The planet or it's inhabitants?
The photo is in case you don't know what a saguaro is. I picked this photos because of the "cristate" crown. Very cool looking, rare and no one is really sure how it happens.
How are my questions illogical? My questions aren't logical questions that one would want to know, to better understand? They say we evolved from a single cell, ok that's cool, but then what?
How did new born babies survive without being able to walk or fend of predators? Wouldn't something higher in the food chain just wipe us out? How did they find food and protection from the elements?
What acted as a womb and provided nourishments and maintained the fetus through out the process?
You are entitled to what you think and so is everybody else. But Everyone is missing my point. After the single cell started to evolve what happened next? If you can answer any of my questions or prove anything to me be my quest.
You not believing in God is your choice, but I do. Your question what came first the planet or its inhabitants? is a good one if you believe the theory of evolution was responsible for our creation. But what created the Earth? And what created whatever created the earth? and so on. So actually the earth is the chicken and it produced life. The planet was just placed here how couldn't the chicken be? Until it can be scientifically proven you cant say what actually happened you can only believe what you think happened. To me until its proven God creating man from soil sounds no more crazier then the theory of evolution created human life.
I am not saying that evolution doesn't exist I'm saying I don't believe it created the first human life.
I've skipped over most of your posts - For Pete's sake, use some white space, why don't you? - but I did read the last paragraph here.
Theists keep saying this - that our planet was just plopped own here and SHAZAM!! Instant life. However, I have never read or heard of science or lay people saying that. Please post a link to that. Thanks.
You are correct that "Until it can be scientifically proven you cant say what actually happened you can only believe what you think happened".
The exact same is true of what you say you believe.
There is no proof. No reason to believe its fact. That's the very definition of "faith" and you're welcome to it. Just don't pretend its fact.
Each of us have looked at what we believe to be evidence and drawn a conclusion from that.
Next time please know what you are talking about before trying to challenge my opinion. You quoted that I said until it can be scientifically proven, never said it was fact, there is no proof of human life was created by a single cell organism, hence, The THEORY of evolution, so if there is no proof means there is no reason for me to believe in something?
Get it together buddy it was a good try but maybe you should of dealt with the limited white space available and read the whole before you make an assumption that I said it was fact. lol how are you going to make any assumption with out reading the whole thing. Oh I'm sorry you just know it all.
Awe man I hate humusIn all likelihood humans were made from humus. Humus is the Black or dark brown layer of earth formed from dead and decaying matter that is teeming with nutrients that give rise to more life.
What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.
I think you hate hummus not humus.Awe man I hate humusIn all likelihood humans were made from humus. Humus is the Black or dark brown layer of earth formed from dead and decaying matter that is teeming with nutrients that give rise to more life.
lol I'm glad you caught thatI think you hate hummus not humus.Awe man I hate humusIn all likelihood humans were made from humus. Humus is the Black or dark brown layer of earth formed from dead and decaying matter that is teeming with nutrients that give rise to more life.
No way. The chicken came first.Thats easy. The egg.
Considering matter has not existed forever, how did it come about?Of course you know to the molecule how much soil God had to use.Genesis says God made Adam from the soil. Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organismPlease show me where the creation account contradicts science.What came first, the chicken or the egg? This question seems to divide the believers of a higher power from the nonbelievers. Science or Religion, was human life created by science or a Higher Power?
Science contradicts the bible, and pretty much says that there is no god. That everything was just here and after billions of years of nothing a rock hit another rock in which created a big bang and billions of years later conditions were just right to create life. But what created the rock?
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
So this microscopic single cell organism that created humans and creatures was just slithering around until it started to evolve and go through the whole process of becoming a living creature that breathes, drinks, eats, sees, hears, tastes, touches, walks, talk, thinks and feels. So.this microscopic single cell organism just happened to undergo the process to develop into a zygote, which needs to single cell organisms to create it, and then turned into and embryo and then into a fetus then eventually into a newborn baby, with no placenta allowing nutrient uptake, no thermos regulation, no waste elimination, and no gas exchange via the mothers blood supply, also providing oxygen and nutrients to the growing fetus and removes waste products from the fetus's blood. Then it turns into a new born baby, how did it survive just laying there not able to care for its self and what protected it from infection, predators, and other natural elements? Any living creature for that matter? Seriously how did it survive the early stages of evolving?
Its just hard to believe that this microscopic organism turned into creatures. What caused the single cell organism to evolve? Something had to trigger the process? Did it emerge with something? Or was it the result of another reaction and started to evolve immediately? Evolving from a microscopic organism, at the beginning, is hard to see it surviving the process of it going from something so small to the first human being.
If we were really evolved from a single cell organism why isn't it still happening? Where is this single cell organism today?
Was there an event or something that caused these single cells to begin evolving? I'm sure there wasn't just one evolving at a time? There had to be an event that occurred, that these single cell organisms were produced as the outcome of the event, and then had to eventually died off after they had a chance to survive and evolve. That's the only possible theory I can come up with for why these single cell organisms aren't producing life today. Is there this secret place on earth that no body knows about, where human life is popping up and there are these people who raise and protect them? Then they just join society like it was nothing?
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
I believe science provides answers and proves things that happened after the first life was created. Science suggesting we evolved from single cell organisms does not prove anything to me. What created that single cell organism, then what created the thing that created the single cell organism, then what created that, and then what created that? It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
In life there are always 2 ways, 2 versions, an action and reaction, positive or negative, right or wrong, left or right, man or woman, living or nonliving, open or closed, free or confined, day or night, land or water, and science or religion.
No body really knows how everything came about, just think what it felt like to be the first human life. What do you think was going through their mind?
There has to be a creator that directed the first human life the right way. I believe in God and all that science crap is just crap. To believe that we came from a microscopic organism to what we are today, and that the process isn't still occurring to this day, doesn't make any sense to me.
Use the verse(s) and no ad hominems.
Speaking of which, how do we define a single cell organism?
Cell are by no means simple as even the Greeks, Romans and Jews knew well over 2,000 years ago, if not more.
The word A-dahm, in Hebrew, does not mean "soil", that's just another in a long series of muck ups in the KJV.
A-dahm mean earth.
Of course Adam was most probably created as an adult because otherwise you would criticize the fact that God had to diaper a baby.
Let's take this from a different point of view, getting more to the crux of the matter...
Do you believe in any way whatsoever that an infinite being could have possibly created something from nothing?
If not, you have the conclusion to your question before there's even a discussion.
I, for one, do not believe matter existed forever.
Then correct your OP.I do understand why some people wouldn't agree with me. Some people believe in god more then others and some don't believe in god at all. And maybe our creator or creators are aliens and we are just a sick experiment for their entertainment. I'm just saying that science contradicts the bibles version on how we are created. Not entirely about everything. I never said god couldn't influence evolution. For me it is easier to believe the bible then science when it comes to the creation of the first human lifePersonally, I believe somewhat in a higher power. But I also believe in science's ability to explain HOW life was set into motion.
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
Evolution is perfectly compatible with creationism if you believe that a god guided it/began it. There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth. And seeing as Genesis was written based on a non-falsifiable untestable story, rather than experimentally-backed theory, I tend to believe science.
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
Humans have very long generational times compared to say, bacteria. Thus the rate at which they evolve is considerably slow. We do have skeletal records that show we have had numerous ancestors that can be traced to us, however, which show some of our evolutionary path to where we are now.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
I'm sure an athiest or a nihilist would contradict you there. But as I've mentioned, spirituality can be factored into science. There is much that science cannot explain, and the idea of God, the afterlife, etc, fits very neatly into that expanse of unknown knowledge. Though concerning the subjective nature of religion, I will say that life is very much what you make it. YOU, and what you BELIEVE IN, gives your life meaning.
It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Let me play devil's advocate and challenge you on this. Why is it one creator? Why not multiple? Maybe perhaps it was one creator among a pantheon of gods? Fuck, maybe it's aliens if you watch the History channel too much lmao.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
I appreciate your ability to be insightful; you understand why people can disagree with you here, and understanding is something I wish people had a lot more of nowadays.
I didn't answer to every paragraph here, but if there's something you'd specifically like to ask me about, please let me know.
You are assuming the Bible contradicts science.
I asked for verses from the Bible to prove that contention.
In other words, I didn't jump the gun and insult you.
I responses directly to your assertion.
If you are now going to back up into a corner and be dishonest concerning your opening post, I suggest you simply edit it to change your assertion.
Then correct your OP.I do understand why some people wouldn't agree with me. Some people believe in god more then others and some don't believe in god at all. And maybe our creator or creators are aliens and we are just a sick experiment for their entertainment. I'm just saying that science contradicts the bibles version on how we are created. Not entirely about everything. I never said god couldn't influence evolution. For me it is easier to believe the bible then science when it comes to the creation of the first human lifePersonally, I believe somewhat in a higher power. But I also believe in science's ability to explain HOW life was set into motion.
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
Evolution is perfectly compatible with creationism if you believe that a god guided it/began it. There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth. And seeing as Genesis was written based on a non-falsifiable untestable story, rather than experimentally-backed theory, I tend to believe science.
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
Humans have very long generational times compared to say, bacteria. Thus the rate at which they evolve is considerably slow. We do have skeletal records that show we have had numerous ancestors that can be traced to us, however, which show some of our evolutionary path to where we are now.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
I'm sure an athiest or a nihilist would contradict you there. But as I've mentioned, spirituality can be factored into science. There is much that science cannot explain, and the idea of God, the afterlife, etc, fits very neatly into that expanse of unknown knowledge. Though concerning the subjective nature of religion, I will say that life is very much what you make it. YOU, and what you BELIEVE IN, gives your life meaning.
It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Let me play devil's advocate and challenge you on this. Why is it one creator? Why not multiple? Maybe perhaps it was one creator among a pantheon of gods? Fuck, maybe it's aliens if you watch the History channel too much lmao.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
I appreciate your ability to be insightful; you understand why people can disagree with you here, and understanding is something I wish people had a lot more of nowadays.
I didn't answer to every paragraph here, but if there's something you'd specifically like to ask me about, please let me know.
You are assuming the Bible contradicts science.
I asked for verses from the Bible to prove that contention.
In other words, I didn't jump the gun and insult you.
I responses directly to your assertion.
If you are now going to back up into a corner and be dishonest concerning your opening post, I suggest you simply edit it to change your assertion.
Contradict means- assert the opposite of a statement made by someone. Science says human life evolved from single cell organism.
Contradict means- Be in conflict with. Science; human evolved from single cell organism Bible; God created man with soil
There isn't any conflict with the two? I never said it contradicts the whole bible as some of you assume. I just stated that science theory of humans evolved from single cell organisms contradicts the bibles God created man out of soil.
How would you describe the difference in believing in a higher power and having a religion?Religion is not the same as believing in a higher power.
Soil doesn't contain single cell organisms?Then correct your OP.I do understand why some people wouldn't agree with me. Some people believe in god more then others and some don't believe in god at all. And maybe our creator or creators are aliens and we are just a sick experiment for their entertainment. I'm just saying that science contradicts the bibles version on how we are created. Not entirely about everything. I never said god couldn't influence evolution. For me it is easier to believe the bible then science when it comes to the creation of the first human lifePersonally, I believe somewhat in a higher power. But I also believe in science's ability to explain HOW life was set into motion.
Science suggests we evolved from a single cell organism just as every other life form. Where did this single cell organism come from? It couldn't of been here when the dinosaurs where here There were no human life with the dinosaurs. Then they became extinct, by some say, an asteroid hitting Earth. Did the single cell organism come from that? Was it on the asteroid that was destined to hit this planet which had perfect conditions for it to create life?
Evolution is perfectly compatible with creationism if you believe that a god guided it/began it. There's really no point of difference unless you believe Genesis is the almighty truth. And seeing as Genesis was written based on a non-falsifiable untestable story, rather than experimentally-backed theory, I tend to believe science.
I can see how some other things evolved through time. But Humans I just don't see it? Since beginning of human life there wasn't that much evolving with human beings. Well maybe mentally but not to much physically?. We evolved with using technology.
Humans have very long generational times compared to say, bacteria. Thus the rate at which they evolve is considerably slow. We do have skeletal records that show we have had numerous ancestors that can be traced to us, however, which show some of our evolutionary path to where we are now.
If science was right then there would be no meaning to life. We just live then die and everything that happened in between just happened. Just creatures wondering around a planet for no logical reason, just a freak accident that occurred in nature, that resulted in life forms that have no real purpose in the universe that are going to inevitably die out.
I find it hard to believe that such a beautiful and complex creation such as life has no meaning. There has to be more, There cant be no reason for our existence. Someone or something had to put time into our creation. Life is to complex for it to just happen.
I'm sure an athiest or a nihilist would contradict you there. But as I've mentioned, spirituality can be factored into science. There is much that science cannot explain, and the idea of God, the afterlife, etc, fits very neatly into that expanse of unknown knowledge. Though concerning the subjective nature of religion, I will say that life is very much what you make it. YOU, and what you BELIEVE IN, gives your life meaning.
It all has to lead to 1 creator, and I believe it is God.
Let me play devil's advocate and challenge you on this. Why is it one creator? Why not multiple? Maybe perhaps it was one creator among a pantheon of gods? Fuck, maybe it's aliens if you watch the History channel too much lmao.
Science is the need for humans to know and understand, and to some trying to prove that we were created some other way makes more sense then believing in an immortal God that we cant see having great powers and created everything. To some, proven answers to questions of life figured out through science is easier to believe then believing in something you cant see, something you cant witness first hand. Even though science hasn't 100% proven their theory of the creation of life, but the facts and evidence they have and the progress of answering more questions then what religion can provide, is good enough for some people.
I appreciate your ability to be insightful; you understand why people can disagree with you here, and understanding is something I wish people had a lot more of nowadays.
I didn't answer to every paragraph here, but if there's something you'd specifically like to ask me about, please let me know.
You are assuming the Bible contradicts science.
I asked for verses from the Bible to prove that contention.
In other words, I didn't jump the gun and insult you.
I responses directly to your assertion.
If you are now going to back up into a corner and be dishonest concerning your opening post, I suggest you simply edit it to change your assertion.
Contradict means- assert the opposite of a statement made by someone. Science says human life evolved from single cell organism.
Contradict means- Be in conflict with. Science; human evolved from single cell organism Bible; God created man with soil
There isn't any conflict with the two? I never said it contradicts the whole bible as some of you assume. I just stated that science theory of humans evolved from single cell organisms contradicts the bibles God created man out of soil.
