|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why is it Evolution versus Creation? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
ahh the sarcasm begins, humor for the weak.
Edited by geatz, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Wow are you gonna backup anything you say, where are you getting this information, off a google search lol. No, from years of Bible study. I was a Christian too, once, and I studied the Bible for a while.
The Gospel of John was written by John and not in 100-120 AD What makes you say that?
I believe what you are refering to is probobly the only found COPY of the Gospel of John which is not the original document. No, that document was a copy made in 150 AD. John was obviously written earlier, but written at the time of Jesus? Written first, as you said? There's no evidence of that. Considerably evidence against it - like the fact that John borrows heavily from the other three Gospels, so clearly it can't predate them.
I could go into depth about every single one of your posts as to how absolutely false they are but I'm hoping that the rest of the community can see where you are getting your information from. How about you substantiate your own assertions? You presented absolutely no proof of any of your statements, after all. What, we're just supposed to take your word for it? Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to show your math. Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
Simply this, if there is more evidence for Jesus and God then why should I believe Evolution when there are holes in the theory.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Because evolution has been mathematically proven true. At least, that's my conclusion based on work in theoretical protein modeling and the operating forces of natural selection and random mutation. (And I can show my work.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cthulhu Member (Idle past 5881 days) Posts: 273 From: Roe Dyelin Joined: |
And what, pray tell, are the holes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
proof....i quoted text? You aren't showing proof. You musta read the atheists view of John. Yes there are some that believe that John may have borrowed from the other three texts, but the concensus does not believe this to be so. It's strange that you would take the word of those that use "fuzzy" logic in this case and yet distaste those that use the same type of logic to disprove evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! protein modeling? what are you starting with? how did you prove 0=1? or 0=?
Edited by geatz, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
if this is just a stupid statistical proof don't bother.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
proof....i quoted text? You quoted nothing in support of your view of John's authorship. Can you present evidence, or can't you?
Yes there are some that believe that John may have borrowed from the other three texts, but the concensus does not believe this to be so. From what I've read, you've got it 100% wrong. In my undergraduate Bible study - at a Lutheran college, nothing to do with atheism - the consensus view of John as presented was that the author was unknown (definately not John the Apostle) and the date was sometime around 100-120 AD, making it the latest of the gospels. You've certainly presented absolutely zero evidence that John is the earliest gospel, as is your assertion. Not even the extremely conservative Christian churches date John before the other Gospels. You're way out on the fringe with your position. What evidence do you have for it? Why do I have to keep asking? And when are you going to show your math?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
But if you have an actually mathematical proof I would like to look at it.
Edited by geatz, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DrJones* Member Posts: 2290 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
Tip: If you reply to your own posts it makes it hard to figure out who you're addressing. Click the reply button on the post you're replying too.
Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given. Just a monkey in a long line of kings. If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! *not an actual doctor
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
geatz Inactive Member |
looking up text for you
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
what are you starting with? Proteins, and the laws of physics, obviously. Why, what are you starting with? It'd be nice if you could show your math. If you want to know more about what I'm talking about, start with Information Theory and Molecular Biology by H. P. Yockey. I'm sure you can find it at your university library.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1496 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I'll try and put something together next week (I'll be away all weekend.) What's your background in molecular genetics?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: Actually, it's not. I'm not sure what the problem here is. The theory of evolution will either be confirmed or refuted on its own merits, based on evidence, and anything about Jesus is entirely irrelevant. Are there "holes" in the theory of evolution? If so, present them. Is there evidence that the earth is only a few thousand years old, or that all the species were individual acts of creation? If so, present it. Kings were put to death long before 21 January 1793. But regicides of earlier times and their followers were interested in attacking the person, not the principle, of the king. They wanted another king, and that was all. It never occurred to them that the throne could remain empty forever. -- Albert Camus
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024