A big problem for Evolution?

[GuidoHunter]

Sigh. First of all: grammar, dude, grammar. It's required of you.

Originally Posted by das1ngerplayer

Many things the Bible has been saying for thousands of years, science has been saying for the past couple hundred years. Places like Isreal, the Red Sea (I think that's the sea Moses parted...not that it's to big a deal), and many cities in the middle east today are all mentioned and have a role in the Bible.

Wow, whoever wrote the Bible has eyes. Proof! The middle east was a nexus of civilization during Jesus' time and long before that. I don't get what this is claiming.

The Bible talks about dinosaurs which we bury up today.

Oh, really? Verses, please. The oxymoron of "burying up" something aside, I don't recall any place in the Bible where fossilized animals were excavated.

No matter what anyone says it is impossiby to deny the Bible's truth.

You just don't get it, do you?

One topic of controversy that is popular, did humans evolve from monkeys (or apes).

Well, that's not what evolution claims to have happened, but I guess you can debate any controversy that you want to concoct.

I'll say two things about that. One is I don't want to believe any idea that I evolved from a monkey, I prefer to be human.

You don't get to be sloppy with your terms for the sake of rhetoric, here. Monkeys are very distantly related to us; apes are our genealogic cousins.

Also, just because you and Koko might have had a common ancestor doesn't for a second mean you're any less human. That just sounds like insecurity to me.

That does not mean that we evolved from them though.

Way to read the thread. It's been said several times that this is not what evolution claims. Stop basing your points on false premises and you might have something to stand on.

If you focus on evolution (like many of you are), you don't see what us christians think. You say your right just because it makes "sense" yet your not considering that we (christians) feel the same way about you (athiests).

Do you have the vaguest idea as to who's a Christian, who's an atheist, and who's neither in this thread? Way to make sweeping generalizations about a group of people of whom you know nothing. I am very much a Christian and have very little problem reconciling the acceptance of evolution with my Christian faith-based beliefs. You're just being intellectually dishonest if you think that there's an overlap and the two are mutually exclusive.

If you say 'Oh, the Bible has no evidence' well I'll say 'Oh, evolution doesn't have much evidence.

What the hell, man? Are all of my posts invisible to you? You're comparing apples and oranges here!

I try to base my opinion on combining both science (evolutiom) and the Bible.

And therein lies your fault. You have to look at something with a specific frame of mind. Either look at an issue scientifically or look at it religiously. They are (and I can't believe I'm having to say this again), by definition, mutually exclusive realms. You CANNOT combine the two, no matter how much you truly want to.

I say what if God created the Big Bang and that's how life came to be in a way (as in just to quickly summarize it). As for evolution, I think there were humans years ago. I do think they may not have been the same a us today but non the less they were humans (not monkeys or apes).

THINK about creationism and how it too is true in many ways.

In what sense is it "true"? You weren't around for the creation of the universe, so you don't know what's true or not. As such, you have to look at the evidence.

In a religious frame of mind, God created the world and said so in the Bible. Case closed, no problems.

In a scientific frame of mind, effectively no evidence points toward creationism and mountains of evidence support evolution.

Now it comes down to which one you would rather trust. You chose the former, clearly, but you cannot fault someone else for choosing the latter. When it all boils down, though, we can't find any "truth" since there's no way to know for sure.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Reach]

it is impossiby to deny the Bible's truth

Lets have some fun with bible quotes, shall we?

http://ffrf.org/quiz/bquiz.php

Try this quiz too if you want

Also, watch this video: http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/...The_Bible.html (if link doesn't work, google penn and teller bull****: the bible


1. Paraphrased: The husband is to rule over his wife. Wives are to be subject to their husbands even when the husband is disobedient to God. Man is the image and glory of God, while woman is the glory of man. Man was not created for woman but woman for man.

Actual quotes (I won't include all of them): 7For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

8For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.



2. Paraphrase: A man who refuses to impregnate his widowed sister-in-law is put to death.


8And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.


3. A child who curses his parent(s) is to be put to death. A stubborn and/or rebellious child is to be put to death.

17And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.


4. Anyone who sacrifices to other gods must be destroyed.


20He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.


5. The eating of blood and fat are prohibited forever.


17It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood


6. A woman who is menstruating is unclean. Anyone who touches her is unclean

19And if a woman have an issue, and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.


7. If a man has sexual relations with both his wife and his mother-in-law, all three of them must be put to death.

14And if a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you.





There are like, hundreds more of things like these.


I'll add one more because its funny XD

8. David dances and exposes himself to his maids

[randomdragoon]

The Bible is written by an author who has basically no scientific credentials, doesn't cite its sources, and is full of weird statements as noted above. If it was examined like a scientific manuscript, it would be instantly thrown into the fire.

[Hr2]

Originally Posted by Reach

Also, watch this video: http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/...The_Bible.html (if link doesn't work, google penn and teller bull****: the bible

I love that show.

[evilbutterfly]

I know it was a while back and talisman said he wouldn't come back, but: There is evidence for a flood IIRC. Pretty much every culture around the world (that was around at the time, at least) has a flood story. The story is basically the same, with a bunch of bad people and one worthy guy (and usually his family) surviving by building a boat. It's an event that most likely happened. The story is at least based in truth, but each version of it has its different points depending on the religion and culture of the writer.

Just wanna say this: I hate when people quote tiny parts of the bible (or any big thing). It's very easy to find things out of context and make them seem ridiculous. Some fanatics find small passages that they feel says they should hate hate blacks or launch crusades against all non-Christians and pervert the overall message of the Bible, which is an especially contradicting thing. You can disregard a huge portion of the old testament cuz Jesus comes in and says to ignore the old rules because "lol I'm Jesus!", basically.

I mean, I could go quote the part in Songs of Solomon where he talks about how his wife's breasts are like two galloping gazelle and her teeth are like a flock of sheep, but what's that gonna prove in a debate about evolution? Nothing. Hey let's make a thread about the presidency and then go argue against him by finding every retarded law in the books and ignore any story it may have behind it. WOW REALLY MEN CAN'T WEAR PINK DRESSES ON SUNDAYS IN SOME STATE OR THEY GET THE DEATH PENALTY? WOW THIS IS RIDICULOUS! It's pointless.

Anywho, I think that one kid had a similar point as mine that I posted way earlier, but he's trying to argue it as fact when this whole thing is a big opinion-fest. I said it earlier, but basically, either the universe has existed forever or something/somebody made it. Science says the later isn't possible, but if you ask me, it's easier to believe that a supreme being has existed forever than for some ball of matter to have existed forever. That's about the most logic I can put behind theism, but it works for me.

Because really, as I said before, science has no explaination for the creation of the universe. Formation of things and life on earth, yeah, we have ideas, but aside from "it's always been here" there's no explaination as to how things got here. And for me, "it's always been here" just doesn't cut it.

[Reach]

I know it was a while back and talisman said he wouldn't come back, but: There is evidence for a flood IIRC. Pretty much every culture around the world (that was around at the time, at least) has a flood story. The story is basically the same, with a bunch of bad people and one worthy guy (and usually his family) surviving by building a boat. It's an event that most likely happened. The story is at least based in truth, but each version of it has its different points depending on the religion and culture of the writer.

Sure, there's lots of evidence for a flood...but a worldwide flood? Are you kidding me?

There is no scientific evidence of the worldwide flood, only counter evidence. Egyptian history dates back to about 3000 BC, and it says nothing about the flood, nor were the egyptians wiped out. The entire story of noah's ark should not be taken seriously.

To read any of the genesis literally is to misunderstand the point.

Just wanna say this: I hate when people quote tiny parts of the bible (or any big thing). It's very easy to find things out of context and make them seem ridiculous.

There's a big problem with this.

So what, its acceptable for the bible to say you can murder little children (actually, god kills a child at one point), and then simply ignore it? Why? This doesn't make any sense. If the bible is to be taken literally you have to examine all of it literally. You can't just say 'oh lol lets ignore that little bit there about selling your daughter and teach the rest'. No, that's ludicrous. If you can read between the lines and ignore literally reading the bible, then the bible in itself is useless since you're making your own guidelines, not using the bibles.

[irishknight]

It's called having faith.

[Tisthammerw]

Originally Posted by Reach

Creationism is wrong.

Creationism, by definition, is the literal reading of the Genesis as proposed by the Holy Bible. There is absolutely no way to defend this ground.

Also, realize that 'creation science', I.E. the supernatural creation of species on Earth, came to be partially because creationism is obviously false.

We have to keep in mind there are several varieties of creation theories, some of which make no appeal to religion or the supernatural (case in point, you may want to read What is Creation Science? to see how "creation scientists" define their beliefs). Misconstruals of what adherents actually adhere to happen all too often in these kinds of debates. On that note, I highly recommend The Battle of Beginnings: Why Neither Side Is Winning the Creation-Evolution Debate. Among other things, it mentions a number of examples on how each side misconstrues the other.

[Lamoc]

Not everyone Believes in god.

[das1ngerplayer]

Originally Posted by Lamoc

Not everyone Believes in god.

And not everyone believes in evolution. Happy now?

[das1ngerplayer]

Originally Posted by irishknight

It's called having faith.

I agree with you but these people don't understand what that means. You have to try and be literal with them or they'll go insane.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by das1ngerplayer

I agree with you but these people don't understand what that means. You have to try and be literal with them or they'll go insane.

Except for me who's been saying this entire time that faith can't be attributed TO SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[aperson]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

Except for me who's been saying this entire time that faith can't be attributed TO SCIENTIFIC THEORIES.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

And who says scientific theory is a basis for knowledge?

[GuidoHunter]

Certainly not I, but I do give it a pretty high esteem.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Lamoc]

The ONLY bible quote I know is this.

Christ Jesuscame into the world to save sinners of whom I am the worst. 1 Timothy 1:15

[lord_carbo]

I know Psalm 137:8-9 (NIV) off the top of my head to justify being pro-choice 8)

Oh and Mark 12:28-31 (NIV) unfortunately.

[GuidoHunter]

That's some pretty flimsy (if not nonexistant) justification for supporting abortion...

Not to mention the fact that taken literally and without context (the only way one can stretch that to have anything to do with abortion), that has NOTHING to do with being pro-choice, but rather with supporting child-killing.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[lord_carbo]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

That's some pretty flimsy (if not nonexistant) justification for supporting abortion...

Not to mention the fact that taken literally and without context (the only way one can stretch that to have anything to do with abortion), that has NOTHING to do with being pro-choice, but rather with supporting child-killing.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Why wait for the baby to be born to kill it? I say go on ahead and kill it. The sooner the better.

Killing babies leaves a bigger mess, too.

[brothaice]

Hmm...Evolution....Well, if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes? With everything else that has "evolved," the weaker counterpart has died off. Hmm...

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by brothaice

Hmm...Evolution....Well, if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes? With everything else that has "evolved," the weaker counterpart has died off. Hmm...

READ THE FREAKING THREAD to find out why your argument holds no water.

Seriously, this is critical thinking, so try to use some instead of regurgitating nonsensical dribble-poop.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com