Evolution vs Creationism?

[Ikari]

who made the cells???

Why does it have to be a who? It's well more likely it's a "what" not a "who".

 

[obvious Child]

I neither wish to be a threat, nor do I wish to be hateful. If you expect me to respond with vitriol you will be disappointed. I've engaged in conversation with atheists for years, and I know you to be an angry bunch of people. Generally speaking, the more I bring the Bible into the conversation, the more angry you get. Do you seriously think I would enter into discourse with a group of atheists and expect an "easy fight"?

Come again? You are hardly a real threat in a concept of debate. Most of your arguments range from pedestrian to pathetic.

I'm not an atheist. Stop assuming things.

The fundamental problem with using the Bible is that you are essentially using the fallacy of begging the question. You seem to realize your arguments fundamentally require magic, but you don't want to address the theological problems it creates.

 

[ObamaIsAMarxist]

so nothing made something okay that makes sense hahahaha!!!!! some how stuff came together and made something that lets human see thats like saying a tornado can hit a junkyard and built an airplane

Why does it have to be a who? It's well more likely it's a "what" not a "who".

 

[Ikari]

so nothing made something okay that makes sense hahahaha!!!!! some how stuff came together and made something that lets human see thats like saying a tornado can hit a junkyard and built an airplane

It's well more likely that it was a natural process instead of magic. But I'm not saying you can't believe in magic. Silly witches.

 

[obvious Child]

I haven't bothered to respond to this, which you repeatedly put in posts, because its silly.

Why is it silly?

You heard somebody say it once and thought it sounded cool, so now it's your mantra.

On the contrary, I came up with the idea myself. Theologically, a belief in literal creationism dictates that the Abrahamic God is a liar. You clearly do not want to address this.

Your argument here is little more then "I say so."

You're welcome to your silliness. If you notice, I've not tried to argue with anyone on here about serious science, because you are all much better versed in that than I am....I would be out of my league immediately. I'm not a scientist, so I don't argue science. But I have found that virtually all atheists consider themselves expert theologians. You claim there is no God, and no evidence of creation, yet you are somehow an expert in the nature and attributes of God. Interesting.

I never claimed there is no God. What I claimed is there is no evidence of literal creationism. Note I also said that this does not mean it never happened, but that the logical outcome if it did happen is that the Abrahamic God is an Epic Liar. Try again and with less fail.

You cannot be a good Christian and accept Literal Creationism.

Creationist are some of the lowest people on the totem pole of debating for a reason. They have no actual arguments. They reject everything they don't like either by giving asinine reasons as you have or simply pretending it doesn't exist (as you have repetively here). And their belief is fundamentally rooted in dishonesty and immaturity. And they tend to be exceptionally arrogant as to dictate that their interpretation, and ONLY their interpretation is correct.

 

[obvious Child]

On page 1 of Richard Dawkins' book "The Blind Watchmaker", Dawkins says, "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." Now, of course he does not agree in any way with a Creator, but he clearly says that there is evidence of what appears to be design.

Come again? That is not what you said.

Even Richard Dawkins admits that much of nature seems to suggest a creator; he just doesn't believe it could be true so it has to be explained.

Design =/= creator. Evolution to fit into an environment is nothing more then adaption. The environment has picked what traits work in its context.

 

[ObamaIsAMarxist]

natural things dont work like that how can a moneky become a person when you cant add dna??? a mouse cant become a cat just like a car cant be a truck evolution is willfull ignorenonce!!!!

It's well more likely that it was a natural process instead of magic. But I'm not saying you can't believe in magic. Silly witches.

 

[obvious Child]

With all due respect, this is a weak response.

You would know. Everything you posted here is incredibly weak.

And it's not a weak response. What happened in the past has already happened. Knowing what happened in the past is HARDLY the most important question. What will happen is far more important.

You've been verbose on most topics, but pretty quiet here. I do understand that evolution does not involve a beginning. It involves the change over time of what exists. But what, then, was the origin of what eventually evolved? The fact that it's in the past DOES matter.

Yes it does matter, but it is not as you claimed, to be the most important question. Notice I am contesting your argument that knowing the origin of life is the most important question ever. I never said it never mattered.

Now I see your sheer dishonesty is coming out. Every literal creationist is fundamentally dishonest at their core.

Evolutionary theory has several dilemmas, and the most serious one is a total lack of a plausible explanation of the origin of life. I know you don't like my answer-- magic, right? -- so present me with a better option.

Natural processes, including those which in the lab have created the building blocks of simple life.

But thanks for admitting that you believe in Creationism because you are too immature to accept that you don't know.

 

[Ikari]

natural things dont work like that how can a moneky become a person when you cant add dna??? a mouse cant become a cat just like a car cant be a truck evolution is willfull ignorenonce!!!!

DNA can change. Do don't need to "add" DNA, tis there. Cars do not have DNA, a cat or mouse do. And as such they can have evolved from common ancestors where in a car will never evolve into a truck. Talk about willful ignorance (spelling is not a huge deal, but when calling someone ignorant, you're really going to want to spell that right or suffer the irony). Well far be it from me to understand the irrational ravings of militant witches.

 

[obvious Child]

Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."

John 14:6, "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'"

There is a day coming, and it could be soon, where the true followers of Christ and the merely religious will be separated like grain and chaff. I believe many will be shocked on that day. You call it hubris, but for me it is nothing more than confidence that the Bible is the book of answers by which we can know God, in whom I have great faith.

Galatians 6:14, "Far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

And since when did Literal Creationism become the criteria to sort the actual from the fake?

Your arrogance is astounding. You think YOU can set the criteria and no one else can. That belief in Literal creationism is the key test and not anything else.

You do not worship the Christian God. You worship your interpretation of the Bible. As all Creationists do. It's not about God with them, it's about feeding their need for power. You have dictated right now that your interpretation and only your interpretation is correct.

 

[ObamaIsAMarxist]

dna cannot change if it did there wouldnt be people it would be all kids of half people and half monkeys animals are animals and they are set things you cannot corss them why dont we ever see a half elephant and half moneky??? becauee dna doesnt work to make macroevolution its impossible

DNA can change. Do don't need to "add" DNA, tis there. Cars do not have DNA, a cat or mouse do. And as such they can have evolved from common ancestors where in a car will never evolve into a truck. Talk about willful ignorance (spelling is not a huge deal, but when calling someone ignorant, you're really going to want to spell that right or suffer the irony). Well far be it from me to understand the irrational ravings of militant witches.

 

[Ikari]

dna cannot change if it did there wouldnt be people it would be all kids of half people and half monkeys animals are animals and they are set things you cannot corss them why dont we ever see a half elephant and half moneky??? becauee dna doesnt work to make macroevolution its impossible

Obviously DNA changes. There are all sorts of measurements on this from birth defects to cancer. We know it changes. You witches sure are stretching these days to maintain magic as the answer.

 

[obvious Child]

Obviously DNA changes. There are all sorts of measurements on this from birth defects to cancer. We know it changes. You witches sure are stretching these days to maintain magic as the answer.

I gotta ask why you're bothering. Either he has no idea what he's talking about or he's deliberately trolling you. Either way, I don't see why you're bothering.

 

[ObamaIsAMarxist]

so birth defects and caner are evolutin???? hahahaha you secular libs sure do know alot about sicence ikari i think you need to read alot more on evolution and creationism you will see that evolution is 100% false and the biblical account of genesis makes total sense like the grand canyon and everything else unharden your heart and stop rebeling against god he loves you more than you know!!!!!! can i pray for you?

Obviously DNA changes. There are all sorts of measurements on this from birth defects to cancer. We know it changes. You witches sure are stretching these days to maintain magic as the answer.

 

[obvious Child]

Please be careful not to lump religion and true Christianity into the same group.

What the hell is true Christianity? You use a lot of fallacies.

Christians have been persecuted since The Way began (as it was called immediately after the death of Jesus) and it continues to this day. Look at what is going on in Egypt, Syria, Iran, etc. The Catholic Church does have the Crusades to answer for, you are correct. The Salem witch trials also are nothing to be proud of. Even so, anyone who would describe Christians as domineering and aggressive does not understand church history.

Huh? So periods where the Church was the sole authority on Christianity and engaged in horrible acts including the enslavement of other Christians is proof that they are not domineering or aggressive? How about the times they deliberately suppressed information that contradicted their views? Galileo anyone? What kind of insane arguments do you think we'll buy? The Puritans were some of the most domineering and aggressive people North America has ever seen. Right now Protestant extremists are trying to legislate their morality in our private lives. Not domineering and aggressive? You have to kidding me.

Well, if your belief is based on magic, it does deem logical that your debate skills are incredibly weak as you have little use for facts.

 

[Ikari]

so birth defects and caner are evolutin????

Not quite. Those happen because DNA changes. Which you said cannot happen. So I'm providing measured proof that shows you are a liar. But not much more is expected out of militant witches.

hahahaha you secular libs sure do know alot about sicence ikari i think you need to read alot more on evolution and creationism you will see that evolution is 100% false and the biblical account of genesis makes total sense like the grand canyon and everything else unharden your heart and stop rebeling against god he loves you more than you know!!!!!! can i pray for you?

Whatever witch. Just because it can't be explained doesn't mean magic did it.

 

[mbig]

dna cannot change if it did there wouldnt be people it would be all kids of half people and half monkeys animals are animals and they are set things you cannot corss them why dont we ever see a half elephant and half moneky??? becauee dna doesnt work to make macroevolution its impossible

You are clueLess about how evolution works.
People should get a Mandatory Natural History education Before being Indoctrinated.

But every species Except us IS a "half-something".. Or more accurately half way TO something else.
One Could say (just for an unscientific example) Chimps are "Half-way" between Humans and Lemurs.
and there ARE living or fossilized species intermediate to Every other specie.
ie, Reptiles, Flightless Winged reptiles, birds, etc

Evolution doesn't happen in one generation.

Ever see any of these (this is the Very short list of a dozens I could display)

ObamaisaMarxist: (or Machoid)
Would you mind telling the board what the other 4 are?
They're Not monkeys or apes.. though they may be 'half way' (in genetic distance) to them.
Why did "god create them"?

 

[Slartibartfast]

evolution cannot b out of creations so it is never a result of constant creation

bc evolution is exclusively as absolutely the objective existence of what is truly superior presently, so of what cannot b objectively perceived that is why evolution point always else rights not its fact existence being evolved

evolution mean what end in constant certain value terms so existence superior value of objective being true present

while creation by definition is opposed to evolution, there cant b creation unless in relative terms but evolution by definition is out of all being object
creation suggest a will base to what look existing, but by definition a will base is nothing end, since u cant want smthg unless u dont have any so the truth of that fact is always nothing result so always lesser by time since the illusion of enthousiasm about willin it really become bored

 

[obvious Child]

Matthew 7:13-14, "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."

John 14:6, "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'"

There is a day coming, and it could be soon, where the true followers of Christ and the merely religious will be separated like grain and chaff. I believe many will be shocked on that day. You call it hubris, but for me it is nothing more than confidence that the Bible is the book of answers by which we can know God, in whom I have great faith.

Galatians 6:14, "Far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

See this thread:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/relig...m-and-abrahamic-religions.html#post1061166142

Good luck explaining your beliefs there.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

 

[obvious Child]

You are clueLess about how evolution works.

I think he's trolling you.

 

[Machoid7]

Come again? That is not what you said.

I did in post #142, but I goofed up--acknowledged in the same post--and most of my comments appear to be quotes that I was responding to. I'm a newbie here...cut me some slack.

 

[obvious Child]

I did in post #142, but I goofed up--acknowledged in the same post--and most of my comments appear to be quotes that I was responding to. I'm a newbie here...cut me some slack.

Honestly, I don't give a **** that you believe in Literal Creationism. The fact that you openly admit it requires magic is worth some respect as most Literal Creationists try to argue their science is right.

My issue with you now is how you are going about declaring that only your interpretation is correct. I'm not a Christian, but I do take offense to the belief that if you reject Literal Creationism, you're going to Hell.

 

[Machoid7]

Come again? You are hardly a real threat in a concept of debate. Most of your arguments range from pedestrian to pathetic.

The fundamental problem with using the Bible is that you are essentially using the fallacy of begging the question. You seem to realize your arguments fundamentally require magic, but you don't want to address the theological problems it creates.

When it comes to science, I do range from pedestrian to pathetic. Please note that I've left the science debate to others. I am closer to the realm of theologian than scientist, and I can't help but wonder at all the predominantly atheist scientists who view themselves as theologians as well. My arguments don't involve magic, in spite of your continued assertions to that effect. I believe in a God who has ZERO limits to His power. The only astounding thing about creation is that He bothered to take six days to complete it. A single thought is all He required. Where is my theological problem? Surely you must know that I'm not alone in my thinking, not by a long stretch. I'm just the only one foolish enough to come here and serve as a punching bag!

 

[obvious Child]

I am closer to the realm of theologian than scientist, and I can't help but wonder at all the predominantly atheist scientists who view themselves as theologians as well.

Not really. But merely because we do not share your particular interpretation does not mean we are incapable of doing our theological analysis. Remember that many atheists became atheists because they started digging into their religion. I'm not an atheist, but I cannot see how you can be a Good Christian had hold a belief that requires a liar God. You don't have to be theological expert to see the problem with that.

My arguments don't involve magic, in spite of your continued assertions to that effect. I believe in a God who has ZERO limits to His power.

If the necessary action required a power outside of the natural, it is therefore Magic. Call it what you want, but it is functionally magic. There is no natural explanation for what happened and multiple natural laws were violated without the presence of a singularity. And there is no evidence for it at all. That is magic.

A God who has zero limits is a God that is nonsensical. Most Christians have moved to the point where God is "All Powerful" in a sense where such power does not contradict himself. Everything that can be done is possible by God. This avoids the stupid can God create a rock so heavy he can't lift it quandary. Having zero limits puts you right back into this problem where God quickly goes nonsensical. If God is nonsensical, then we cannot understand it as it is by definition without sense. You seem very young as you haven't delved much into your religion.

Where is my theological problem? Surely you must know that I'm not alone in my thinking, not by a long stretch. I'm just the only one foolish enough to come here and serve as a punching bag!

Basically that your belief mandates a Liar God. Just because more then a few people hold your belief doesn't make it true. A thousand people could argue the sky is neon purple with pink polka dots. That doesn't make it true.