Ignorant Creationists vs. Knowledgeable Evolutionists

Well, that isn't exactly how it worked.What really happened is that life evolved to fit the environement as it happened, randomly, to come out. It is not the location of the earth or moon that happened to be in the right place, rather because the earth and the moon were where they are, life evolved as we have found it. Well, just about every critter is a transitional so they are all transitionals. We don't have billions yet but given time that's not unreasonable to expect that one day we'll have billions of examples.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi Ned. I was going to take a breather, but see your post so I'll address it and then take a break. Amos 3:7 The prophecies seem to imply otherwise, Ned. God even knows the numbers of hairs on each head and when every sparrow falls. He's totally in charge of all the details, according to scripture. I don't expect you to believe that, but people who claim Biblical religion, imo, should at least go by those scriptures which originate their religion. Else they should have little reason to believe in any of it. No, of course not. I decide nothing. I simply read his book verified by scores of fulfilled prophecy and let Jehovah God be the I AM, the existing one who has revealed himself to us so wonderfully.

---

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

The more you interpret, the more you obfuscate what is written. I take it to mean what it says as most other non fiction books do without the need for interpretation. The Bible has no word for reptile or snake so I believe the serpents were a reptilian species, possibly the dinosaurs as I have described in another thread. Whatever they were, they were cursed to crawl on their bellies according to the record. The record clearly implies that they were more intelligent than all the other animals. Whether or not this includes some kind of natural communication with humans, or whether the serpent was enabled supernatually by Satan to speak, nobody knows. If you believe Adam and Eve existed, I see no reason not to believe in the deception and fall as the record states. Jesus and the apostles alude to it as it was literal, effecting the sinful nature, the fall of man and the need for redemption, so it is paramount to correlate NT doctrine and it's message.Evolutionists, including creo-lutionists MUST severely undermine the Biblical record in order to argue for a random mutation and natural selection explanation for the complex world and things in it with God simply standing by, observing as a spectator.

Where's Kc8rdb gone?

quote:

---

Evolutionists, including creo-lutionists MUST severely undermine the Biblical record

---

Actually, we just have to let the material world undermine the biblical "record".

Actually - modern man is still guilty of Eden - all the difference is - that Erectus was on his way out of Africa with a small brain - and when hominin evolved into modern man - then we would have had to answer to God, as he would have had the brain capabilities, and the breathe of life (Spirit) put in him.So - Jesus himself used the OT against the OT'ers of his day.Either Baugh or Ham have told you that the literal Genesis is crucial to the NT. What they haven't figured out is that evolution is literally irrelevant to the meaning if Genesis.Example; Human civilisations have existed for thousands of years - with no observable morphological differences of any major aspect. It just turns out that God is so clever - that he can evolve us - and even fit our entire existence as spiritual beings - into this evolution, without us even knowing about it.So evolution becomes irrelevant to Genesis Buz - as all our evolving was done before Adam - and the OT and NT - are still intact, and still used for showing the inspired words of God.I can certainly stick by the texts and evolution - it's surprisingly easy Buz, there's not much "fitting" needed even.So am I now excommunicated from the brethren Buz?This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 11-10-2004 09:10 AM

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAThat should be like framed and sold as the worlds best example of desperate rationalisation.

Erm, excuse me, can you please add a name so we know who you are referring to? Or are you just being rude?

It was in response to your post above.

quote:

---

So by the same token, do you believe in God-selection (GS) rather than secularist natural selection (NS) and God-mutation rather than secularist random mutation?

---

How do you tell the difference between them?

quote:

---

I suggest that you learn all you can from this place, but do try to comprehend all you can as to how wonderfully complex living things are and the extremely low the odds of it all coming about without an intelligent designer and creator to make it happen so precisely and so complete.

---

What are the odds, Buz? Please show your math.What do you mean by "precisely" and "complete"?Please be specific.

quote:

---

Consider also that planet earth, among all the planets in our solar system just happens to be the exact distance from the sun and moon and just happens to have all the elements and the water, etc to make it the exclusive right place for life so far as we are able to observe from earth. Could all this have come to be randomly and naturally? I don't think so.

---

Why not?Please be specific.Please show your work.

Let's be fair. Mike has provided much better examples of desperate rationalization.regards,
Esteban Hambre

It's not desperate rationalisation. I don't need to... Genesis - if regarded as a significant mysterious book concerning the beginning of man (homo sapiens) - is truly irrelevant to evolution. If one regards it as a happy and true story given to the Hebrews to please God - Or I believe in mitochondrial Eve - just where is the problem? It's none-existant - why? Because the story is about man's sin - and is just as prevailent/relevant as Jesus's parables.This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 11-10-2004 09:27 AM

Hi Buz!Even though I know that you will either1) Ignore this message completely, or2) reply but not give any specific, useful, substantive answers to my very specific questions,your poor logic needs to be addressed.

quote:

---

As if any of us were there to know exactly.

---

...then you must reject Genesis, too, because no one was there to know exactly.How many times do you have to have this explained to you, Buz? Why do you keep using the same refuted arguments and poor logic over and over again?

quote:

---

Someone on this thread was just saying that creos think they know it all You people seem to be the ones who think thataway.

---

Buzsaw, what would falsify your belief in the literal truth of the Bible?Nothing?I can list at least a dozen scenarios, if found to be true, that would falsify evolution for me.Who thinks they "know it all", the person who keeps believing no matter the evidence, or the person who will change their mind when new evidence comes in?

quote:

---

...and precious little in the fossil record for verifying the billions of should be transitionals.

---

1) Please describe exactly what would constitute a transitional form for you, Buz.2) Please explain why there should be billions of them, including an explanation of your understanding of how fossils form, how much of the Earth has been explored for fossils, and how rare fossilization is.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 11-10-2004 09:32 AM

Erm - thanks,,.....I think.