Creation vs. Evolution

[photohikedive]

do you believe all the stories of the bible are fact?

 

[sandjeep]

photohikedive,

Boats of doom do NOT need teeth. Furthermore, the calming blue interior is needed to pacify the passengers just enough so they can actually USE the boat.

Your sig, what does it relate to?

 

[sandjeep]

do you believe all the stories of the bible are fact?

Yes, I will state also that nothing has ever been discovered in Archeology that disproves the Bible and historical events.

 

[sandjeep]

Animals do not commit suicide, but HUMANS can and do. Interesting..so how does this fit into evolutionary thought? Is it an evolved trait?

 

[shakeybrainsurgeon]

Yes, I will state also that nothing has ever been discovered in Archeology that disproves the Bible and historical events.

Archeology proves that there were two species of humans in Europe at one time, neanderthals and homo sapiens. Both show signs of religious practices, such as ritualistic burial. Neanderthals likely had the power of speech and were clearly human, but of a different lineage. Were Adam and Eve neanderthals or homo sapiens? Or do neanderthals have different origins, a different bible? Or did Adam and Eve diverge into two hominid species?

And all of the geological evidence that the earth wasn't created six thousand years ago in an instant, but cooled into its present state over billions of years?

And the Ark really held multiple pairs of millions of species? The South American millipede, there were two of those? Modern zoos can't maintain some species in captivity, but Noah did? How do you sex a millipede (oops, two males, sorry).

And the two gospels that trace Christ's lineage, they are different, They both can't be right.

The onus is on Biblical believers to prove the truth of the biblical histories, not for others to disprove it. As Carl Sagan said, extradordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

People can believe the bible as a matter of faith, that's their right. But to consider it historical or scientific fact to be taught in secular schools is another matter.

 

[shakeybrainsurgeon]

You keep refering to what Jesus said. That's all good but what about the rest of the Bible?
.

If I recall, the Bible, either in genesis or exodus, lays out very specific instructions regarding dietary behaviors, the treatment of women with regards to hygienic issues, food preparation and so on. It's been a while since I read it, so correct me if I'm wrong. Do fundamentalist Christians follow these detailed instructions, as the Jews do, and if not, why not? Christ, when admonished by the Pharisees for not washing or following other dietary requirements as required by the Law, rejects the Law. Is not Christ the new covenant, to replace the old?

As for other aspects of the new testament, such as the acts of the apostles, revelation, the letters of Paul, they were written by people who never met Christ and, even in the case of the gospel of John, never even met anyone who had met Christ. There is no historical evidence that these writings contain anything but second-hand stories or the personal philosphy of the authors.

 

[H2Andy]

I remain unconvinced.

don't argue with Mike. he'll just throw in a bunch of Bible verses from all over that
don't quite say what he says they say, and argue that it's crystal clear



and when you show him a crystal clear verse, he'll throw in a bunch of other Bible verses that make everything muddled and say that the verse you first quoted is far from clear and it doesn't mean what it says



for example, when Jesus said, "some of you won't taste death before you see the Son of Man coming in his glory," that's not what he meant.

somehow Jesus meant something else, like "what i mean is that 2,000 years from now, you'll all be dead, but i won't have showed up yet. don't worry."

Yes, I will state also that nothing has ever been discovered in Archeology that disproves the Bible and historical events.

that's not true.

you say that because you haven't taken the time to study archeology.

you just read one side of the story, and think that's sufficient.

on the other hand, you probably shouldn't waste your time reading archeology. you'd find some way to discount the evidence.

because NOTHING can prove to you that God is not real? am i right?

you'd still believe.

 

[photohikedive]

Yes, I will state also that nothing has ever been discovered in Archeology that disproves the Bible and historical events.

other than that whole 6000 years old thing.

continuing the ark thing, how did all those animals, bugs, birds etc, fit on the boat. where did they store the food? what about the sheer amount of waste the animals produced? how about all the deseases in the world, was Noahs family holding them all until the population was restored enough to spread them?

 

[novicediver]

I was going to say something to refute Noah's flood, but I figure it really isn't worth my time as it wont convince anyone. I am going to leave this thread and go back to vintage dive gear.

 

[sandjeep]

shakeybrainsurgeon,

you'll have to pick on a Catholic over it. LOL

Don’t look at me either as I’m not Catholic. As I have stated before, I am a Christ follower and attend a non-denominational church. Someone mentioned purgatory a while back and I actually had no idea, as it’s not in the KJV. Sorry, can’t help you with this.

Archeology proves that there were two species of humans in Europe at one time, neanderthals and homo sapiens

. ….Snip….

Please site your source.

And the Ark really held multiple pairs of millions of species? The South American millipede, there were two of those?

… snip…

Kind, not species. How much room do you need?

The onus is on Biblical believers to prove the truth of the biblical histories, not for others to disprove it. As Carl Sagan said, extradordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Actually, these things are just not that extraordinary to me. That fact that God is the only being that can change a human heart, now that’s extraordinary.

People can believe the bible as a matter of faith, that's their right. But to consider it historical or scientific fact to be taught in secular schools is another matter.

Wait just a minute here. You, Sir, are getting into something very tricky. Should I drag out the record again concerning what has been taught in the public schools over the last 30 years as facts? These so-called facts were used to prop up the claims of evolutionists who were determined to teach their agenda. What was the Scopes trial really about and who was pushing it? I believe the TOS prevents me from speaking directly about this.

Now, I think science in itself is worthwhile. I do not have an issue with it, however when science steps over the line and instructs students on the exact origins of Life, over the wishes of the parents, then it has gone too far. It is forced propaganda, no less. I mentioned before that ToE has become the religion of secular America. How much conflict has this caused in the lives of students when mom & dad have taught one thing and teachers, even as late as the 90s, are demanding students study textbooks containing the Urey Experiment and the textbooks call it a success?

The problem with the Luddites who question modern science is their selectivity. They have no problem using the Internet or TV to spread claptrap like creationism, or having cardiac bypass surgery, or driving hybrid cars, or listening to CD players, or any of a million other things based on the physics, chemsitry and biology they view as propaganda.

I have a problem when the rights of parents are overruled. Home school? Yes, that’s an option, however in many places, if you do decide to home school your children, you STILL pay school taxes. Nuts, I don’t have children and I am forced to pay school taxes in order for evolution to be taught as fact.

Forced is the operative word here, as is the word indoctrination.

Luddites! I like that. I’m sorry that I missed where you explained how secular schools teach children how to think, rather than WHAT to think.