Page 2 of 34 FirstFirst 123456712 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 675
  1. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex View Post
    At-least, we know that Jesus died and rose again.
    Well, you're half right.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Alright, we had a nice little debate over in the "Partial-birth abortion" thread, but since things were getting off-topic (is that possible in an off-topic board?) I figured I'd start a new thread solely for this debate.

    To start off I'll state what I believe and my purpose for this thread.

    I am a believer in God and Jesus the Christ. I believe that the world was made in six days between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. I base that belief on what I read in the Bible, and what creation scientists have found in nature. I am not trying to change anybody's mind with my postings, I'm just in it for the intellectual stimulus. There can be no "winner" in this argument since both sides have grown up believing what they believe, and since both sides rely on faith for their belief.

    This thread may get 100 posts, or it may sink down to the bottom and die. Either way I thought we should have a chance to discuss our scientific, philosophic, and theologic differences.
    Musicman, if you want to hear more about the scientific perspective, I suggest reading this:
    http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/introduction.html
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by cjvitek View Post
    The existence of the divine can not be proven or disproven by science. AS such, it is a matter of faith. Whether someone chooses to believe in God, Gods, the flying spaghetti monster, or whatever is a matter for personal reflection and development.

    As such, I am in no way going to try to argue against the existance of God scientifically. It can't be done. For people who do believe in a divine being, I wish them the best in their faith, and I hope their faith brings them comfort and helps them when they need it.

    And for the record, I am an atheist.

    However, individual faith does not preclude a belief in science/evolution. As clulup points out, many, many Christians do believe in evolution, so the belief in a Christian diety does not preclude the belief in evolution.



    This is what precludes a belief in evolution - a literal interpretation of the Bible. And because this literal interpretation is grounded in faith, there is no way to approach it in a matter to disprove it.
    Exactly echoes my views.

    I know many people who have changed their belief at some point in their post-childhood days (say, after turning 20 or so).
    And after 70 or so, many of these people's views change again, I would guess.
  4.    #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
    Musicman, if you want to hear more about the scientific perspective, I suggest reading this:
    http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/introduction.html
    A quote from your own link:

    Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as "true." Truth in science, however, is never final, and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
    Emphasis is my own.
  5.    #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Adam & Eve ... literal? Yes or No?
    I would say yes.

    If man was created by evolution, why don't we have humans with gills? Why don't we have humans with wings? These types of humans seem like they would be more fit to be at the top of the food chain, and the ones with gills would fall in line with evolution's claim that all life came from the sea. Because all humans are genetically the same, we must conclude that they were all the product of a single couple.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    I would say yes.

    If man was created by evolution, why don't we have humans with gills? Why don't we have humans with wings? These types of humans seem like they would be more fit to be at the top of the food chain, and the ones with gills would fall in line with evolution's claim that all life came from the sea. Because all humans are genetically the same, we must conclude that they were all the product of a single couple.
    But human embryos do have gills, and of course wings are impractical in a body our size, not to mention we would not have arms them. I prefer my very useful arms please.

    Humans also have animal cousins, which to people who accept evolution is confirmation that we are related to a common ancestor also.

    Surur
  7.    #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup View Post
    Besides, how dare you claim the Bible says earth is only 6,000 to 10,000 years old? Where does it say that? Why do you offend the 99.8% of Christians who believe otherwise (or, more correctly, know better)?

    The great majority of Christians - e.g. Catholic Christians who make up more than half of all Christians - have no issues with evolution. The Catholic leader has made it infallibly clear that evolution and Christian beliefs do not contradict each other, and rightly so.

    What makes you think you, a member of a tiny group with a - may I say extremist - belief system when it comes to scientific results, is right, and the rest of the world (both scientific and Christian or otherwise religious) is wrong?
    According to our history book, the Bible (the first five books are also called the Torah in Israel), we can extrapolate the age of the earth by looking at the geneology written down in Genesis chapter 5. It gives us the geneology and ages of 11 generations from Adam to Noah. Those 11 generations comprise about 1,556 years. Many scientists claim that a major world catastrophe occured around 4,000 - 5,000 years ago. They do not call it the Biblical flood, they say that an asteroid hit, or some other event happened to begin an Ice Age. They will tell you that somehow the ocean currents got disrupted, eliminating the heat transmital in the ocean, causing an ice age. The Biblical flood would be an excellent cause for the ocean currents to stop moving. Thus 4k-5k + 1,556 = around 6.5k years.

    Another interesting fact revolving around a world culture are the pyramids found in Egypt, Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa. They have found pyramids on almost every continent in the world. Scientists are baffled about how the civilizations at almost the exact same time period all built pyramids. The Bible also gives an answer for that in Genesis 11 it talks about all the people of the world living in one place and trying to build a tower to heaven. God saw it and made them each speak in a different language so they could not understand each other, and it says he scattered them all over the earth. So now people who used to ive in one place and were building one building are now scattered all over the earth building the same building. That's some coincidence.
  8.    #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    But human embryos do have gills, and of course wings are impractical in a body our size, not to mention we would not have arms them. I prefer my very useful arms please.

    Humans also have animal cousins, which to people who accept evolution is confirmation that we are related to a common ancestor also.

    Surur
    From: http://www.rae.org/gillslit.html

    The idea that human fetuses have gill slits is a part of what was known as the Biogenetic Law. "The idea that the embryo of a complex animal goes through stages resembling the embryos of its ancestors is called the Biogenetic Law." (4) This "Law", also known as recapitulation theory, (i.e., "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny") was formulated in 1866 by Dr. Ernst Haeckel, an early scientific convert to Darwinism. How has this "Law" fared since then?

    In 1874 another german professor, Wilhelm His, showed that Haeckel had deliberately altered earlier sketches of human and dog embryos to support the Biogenetic Law. (5) Professor His was ignored by evolutionists in spite of the "blatant fraud" and the exacting detail in which he was able to show how the fraud had been generated. (6) Taylor comments:
    "His, whose work still stands as the foundation of our knowledge of embryological development, was not the first to point out the deficiencies of Haeckel's work, nor indeed was he the last, yet Haeckel's fraudulent drawings have continued to the present day to be reproduced throughout the biological literature."(7)

    But what about the infamous "gill slits" shown in Haeckel's sketches? A modern medical text states:
    "The pharyngeal arches and clefts are frequently referred to as branchial arches and branchial clefts in anology with the lower vertebrates, [but] since the human embryo never has gills called 'branchia', the term pharyngeal arches and clefts has been adopted for this book." (13)

    In an introductory text on creation science, biologist Dr. Gary Parker explains:
    "The throat (or pharyngeal) grooves and pouches, falsely called "gill slits" are not mistakes in human development. They develop into absolutely essential parts of human anatomy. The middle ear canals come from the second pouches, and the parathyroid and thymus glands come from the third and fourth... another pouch, thought to be vestigial by evolutionists until just recently, becomes a gland that assists in calcium balance. Far from being useless evolutionary vestiges, then, these so-called "gill slits" are quite essential for distinctively human development." (14)

    REFERENCES

    1. Brown, Relis, Biology (Boston: DC Heath & Co., 1960), 658 pages.
    2. Ibid, pp. 488-489.
    3. Tattersall, Ian, The Fossil Trail (NY: Oxford University Press, 1995), p. 167.
    4. Ref. 1, p. 489.
    5. His, Wilhelm, Unsere Korperform (Leipzig: C.W. Vogel, 1874).
    6. Taylor, Ian, In the Minds of Men: Darwin and the New World Order (Toronto: TFE Publishing, 1991), p. 276.
    7. Ref. 6, p. 276. See also: Assmuth & Hull, Haeckel's Frauds and Forgeries (India: Bombay Press, 1911).
    8. Thompson, W.R., "Introduction" to Everyman's Library (#811) Darwin's The Origin of the SpeciesI/i> (New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1956), p. xvi.
    9. Sunderland, Luther, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems (El Cajon, CA: Master Books, 1987), p. 119.
    10. Ibid.
    11. Kenyon, Dean & Percival Davis, Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins (Dallas: Haughton Publishing Co., 1993), p. 129. Dr. Kenyon authored the standard evolutionary text, Biochemical Predestination.
    12. Bock, Walter, Science 164:684 (1969).
    13. Langman, Jan, Medical Embryology (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins, 1975), p. 262.
    14. Morris, Henry & Gary Parker, What is Creation Science? (El Cajon, CA: Master Books, 1987), p. 64.
    15. Beer, Gavin de, "Darwin and Embryology," in A Century of Darwin, S.A. Barnett ed. (London: Heineman, 1958), p. 159.
    16. Ref. 6, p. 279.
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Because all humans are genetically the same, we must conclude that they were all the product of a single couple.
    Must?

    There are absolutely no other explanations? None whatsoever?

    This sort of reasoning is what drove me away from the religion of my upbringing. I felt I was inflicting intellectual treason upon myself.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    According to our history book, the Bible (the first five books are also called the Torah in Israel), we can extrapolate the age of the earth by looking at the geneology written down in Genesis chapter 5. It gives us the geneology and ages of 11 generations from Adam to Noah. Those 11 generations comprise about 1,556 years. Many scientists claim that a major world catastrophe occured around 4,000 - 5,000 years ago. They do not call it the Biblical flood, they say that an asteroid hit, or some other event happened to begin an Ice Age. They will tell you that somehow the ocean currents got disrupted, eliminating the heat transmital in the ocean, causing an ice age. The Biblical flood would be an excellent cause for the ocean currents to stop moving. Thus 4k-5k + 1,556 = around 6.5k years.

    Another interesting fact revolving around a world culture are the pyramids found in Egypt, Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa. They have found pyramids on almost every continent in the world. Scientists are baffled about how the civilizations at almost the exact same time period all built pyramids. The Bible also gives an answer for that in Genesis 11 it talks about all the people of the world living in one place and trying to build a tower to heaven. God saw it and made them each speak in a different language so they could not understand each other, and it says he scattered them all over the earth. So now people who used to ive in one place and were building one building are now scattered all over the earth building the same building. That's some coincidence.
    I dont think a lot of what you say is accurate.

    Surur
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Just because we have re-purposed these structures in mammals, which would have turned to gills in fish does not mean they are not related.

    Surur
  12.    #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I dont think a lot of what you say is accurate.

    Surur
    Nice.
  13.    #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Just because we have re-purposed these structures in mammals, which would have turned to gills in fish does not mean they are not related.

    Surur
    Explain exactly how a baby re-purposes the structures it has.

    Or could it be that the structures we have do what they are suppsoed to do? How can "gills" turn into ear canals on a human, but gills on a fish?
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    Explain exactly how a baby re-purposes the structures it has.

    Or could it be that the structures we have do what they are suppsoed to do? How can "gills" turn into ear canals on a human, but gills on a fish?
    As even your article says, the embryonic structures develop into anatomical features such as ears and jaw bones which primitive fish never would have needed. Evolution hardly ever throws anything away.

    Surur
  15.    #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    As even your article says, the embryonic structures develop into anatomical features such as ears and jaw bones which primitive fish never would have needed. Evolution hardly ever throws anything away.

    Surur
    You speak of evolution as a unifying force in life. You have personified it in the statement above.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    You speak of evolution as a unifying force in life. You have personified it in the statement above.
    Its a process, and it has been pretty well characterized.

    Surur
  17. #37  
    All one has to do is google Bible contradictions and decide for himself whether the bible can be read literally. The Bible itself destroys all of the fundamentalists' arguments... well imo anyway, and Im in the heart of the bible belt
  18. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Adam & Eve ... literal? Yes or No?
    No one has the courage of their convictions?
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    No one has the courage of their convictions?
    I shall say NO
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    No one has the courage of their convictions?
    Quote Originally Posted by Musicman247 View Post
    I would say yes.
    Musicman has.

    Surur
Page 2 of 34 FirstFirst 123456712 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions