Actually it's the opposite. People reject what the Bible says so they make up a tale (evolution) as an excuse to reject him.
Colossians 1:16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;
@KingJamesBible so you believe a book written who knows how many years agoo? how do u know this is accurate or if it was just written by a crazy, uneducated person?
@KingJamesBible religious freaks reject evolution because they believe in a book that was written long ago when people had very little understanding of the world and how they came to be.
people created religion as a way to explain why they are here and how they got here. know we know why we are here and how we got here but religious people still believe in the writings of the people who had no idea how they came to be so reject any other explanation
Nothing like a broad brush stoke to claim anyone who rejects evolution is automatically a "freak" You will make an excellent New World Order slave. You already are.
@smileinglasgow dude you are so far off its completley unrealistic to put any hope or even thought into what you just said.Talk about a evolutionay stooge...wow.God said the Bible is for all times that includes the future.You believe in something that HAS NO proof and never will.Your best evolutionary experts even admit there is no proof.There is far more pointing to a real Creator ...a real God than you have in your evolution.Amazing how easily people can be deceived.
@KingJamesBible Good verse ! Now that sounds like some book that was written a long time ago when people had very little understanding of the world doesnt it. as stated by smileinglasgow.Sounds to me the understanding has always been there and your right.People reject God just as Christ says they will do..Man doesnt want to answer to God,therefore lets devise a theory that has no substance so we can pretend there is no God.
@ThTgUyInUrBaSmEnT God explained it all. You just fail to research it.You just want to retreat to a baseless theory.Hmmm sounds like something Im willing to gamble my eternity or eternal life on.Its easier for me to believe that God inspired man through His Holy Sprirt and told them what to write instead of believing in something that has no answers.Basically people just want to reject what God says in the Bible.Which isnt surprising since it tells of all that will be deceived
Interpretations belong to God (Gen. 40:8) The Holy Spirt which dwells in all believers (John 14:17) leads and guides the believer into all truth (John 16:13) The Bible tells us to compare spiritual things with spiritual (1Cor. 2:13) and it is God's words that are spiritual according to Jesus Christ "the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (John 6:63) So, we compare scripture WITH scripture with the help of the Holy Spirit can find the "intrepertation"
@InsanityComplex1 So why you come to watch a video that you already basically knew what it was going to be about.For arguments sakes or just so you could open yer poluted pie hole with that type language?.More and more i see atheists and evolutionist name calling,wanting to pick fights etc.You know you actually do a very poor job in representing your beliefs considering you use language that is frowned upon by most any sect,religion or person in general.
@Lutherblue2004 "For arguments sakes or just so you could open yer poluted pie hole with that type language?."
-What about the christians who do use "that type language"? Stop being such a big baby.
"More and more i see atheists and evolutionist name calling,wanting to pick fights etc"
-What about the christians who call everyone without faith "abominable sinners", "heathens" and so on? Not to mention the threats of eternal damnation? Yeah, you're all just perfect angels aren't you?
@InsanityComplex1 dude if ya want to send me a private email I have so many verses that proove God tolld of everything evolutionists have come up at least their facts part of their side thousands of years before evolution was even a thought in darwins deceived mind.If you want Ill send them.DNA TIME SPACE MATTER, SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM.PROCESS OF UNIVERSAL DECAY etc.BTW , 2nd law of thermodynamics wasnt even doscovered until the 1800's an is a MONUMENTAL embarrassment to evo's
Yes Ive been convinced for a lil bit we are intetelgent designed
NOT BY GOD that's the reason people don't take this serious is because these still some what I gnarly minds falling to religion an trying to converge them u can prove DNA is Intellegently Designed you cant have stable proof of the "father of Jesus Christ as the ruler of the universe "
Theses simple minds needa quite jumping into their personal beleifs of the "GOD"
The only god we worship is ourselves and the surroundings around
All scientific logic points to a Creator. There's nothing scientific about the theory that an extremely complex program such a DNA just came into being by chance. An explosion in a car factory will never produce a Rolls-Royce.
@PilotDownhill yea and when yer standing in front of Him after yer dead in this life I wonder if that will be your plead at that time.You must be what 13 maybe?
If something is so complex that it must require a designer (which I understand is the basic tenet of ID), and the example of, say, DNA is used to make the point, then there must also exist something so simple that it DOESN`T require a designer. If there isn`t such simplicity, then the word complex has no meaning, because everything then is complex, and therefore everything requires a designer. It`s circular.
So, challenge: Give an example of such simplicity.
Holy, Holy, Holy, and Glory, Glory, Glory is manifest in YHWH and His Son, the LAMB! Thank you Father for making me, growing me, teaching me, and loving me...Thank You!!!
If creation hypothesis can unify the observed facts we base evolution theory on, then their hypothesis might be upgraded to the theory status. MIGHT. But probably not though since all knowledge of chemistry and biology shows everything we see is a matter of simple physical laws of atoms. For creation hypothesis to be true, then chemical affinity and brownian motion cannot exist. There can be no electromagnetic force. Because with these, life is entirely possible, even unavoidable if all is there
Creation hypothesis also fails to explain observed genetic mutations. Do they honestly think God is manipulating the DNA molecule of pathogens right in front of us?
And they fail to show us the chemistry that says the DNA/RNA/TNA/GNA molecule cannot change. Do creationists think the nucleotides that make up bad mutations are any different than nucleotides that make beneficial mutations? Do creationists think gene copying errors is an act of God, or simply gene replication errors?
Creation hypothesis fails to properly explain facts like shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, accurate predictions made by molecular phylogenetics, biogeography (species are found in strata age and locations at predicted evolutionary origins), fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, comparative embryology that shows vestigial gene expression of previous life, or why ALL living species today can be traced back to a predecessor (NO completely novel organisms)
People need to stop taking ancient mythology seriously. You don't see adults dressing up like wizards after they read Harry Potter and firmly believing there's magical entities in the world. Just because the mythology is 3,000-4,000 years old literature doesn't make it any less pathetic.
It's mind boggling to see how much science one must deny to hold onto bronze-age mythological belief. Normally, when people are proven wrong they don't continue holding onto false knowledge. When children learn 2 + 2 doesn't equal 5 you don't see them continuing to say it does. Or even if they did, that's ok, they're just children. It's not okay when adults are shown mountains of incontestable evidence that independently confirm an explanation, like plots in a story converging into one picture.
This video has many flaws, but in essence the logical fallacy the scientists are making is as follows - "DNA is too complex for anything we currently know is possible -therefore god must have did it". When you ask -"How did god come about?" -You get a wishy washy answer (Not answered in this video) like "He is eternal". Why not say matter has always been here i.e. eternal? And how does that answer how he was "created" if he wasnt created - he couldnt have come from "nothing" right?Nobody knows!
When I see creationists attempt to understand science, I see people who are self-conscious about blindly believing in bronze-age mythology. We all know religion is fucking stupid when we actually think about it for 2 seconds, but some people block that out as if it's bad to know the truth about life and the cosmos. The science is actually far more amazing and inspiring than the most fantastic stories taught in religion, when you truly understand it
@gburu2004 That's why we have private schools where parents can send there children to a place where the Christian beliefs are similar. Same thing should go for evolution. It should not be taught in public schools, but rather a private school. It is not science, because science deals with hard facts which evolution is not, hence the word theory.
"evolutionism is the exact opposite of reality, the exact opposite of the laws of physics, an inverted fantasy based on infinite miracles never observed or experimentally verified. It fulfills the definition of a religion"
This fantasy should not be taught to ADULTS, let alone "children"
"evolutionism is the exact opposite of reality, the exact opposite of the laws of physics, an inverted fantasy based on infinite miracles never observed"
LOL, and of course he can't refute the evidence. All he can do is fling his shitty opinion around and flaunt his fake college degree to make him sound credible.
Evolution is one of the most well supported and well documented theories in science. And it HAS been observed.
@KingJamesBible Really You're using the logical fallacy of appeal to an authority? SHOW me the evidence! There are over ten thousand journal articles containing data that contradicts your quote statement! All you have to do is a pubmed search and read.
Try the wikipedia page on evolution along with their page of supporting evidence. Look at the bottom of the page for citations to biologists/scientific journals
"Evolution is a religion, it's not science"
Religion = belief in divinity or supernatural entities with faith instead of evidence
Look on google for "scientific evidence for evolution" and "empirical data evolution"
@KingJamesBible I think we've been over this before, not entirely sure.
You have a straw man idea of what evolution is, evolution is simply variation of alleles in organisms. That's why speciation, mutations, adaptation, natural selection, common ancestry etc. Are all under the heading of evolution, these are sub categories. Now I assume you have nothing wrong with any of them except for perhaps common ancestry.
For common ancestry I suggest you look into Endogenous retro viruses.
"For common ancestry I suggest you look into Endogenous retro viruses"
And molecular phylogenetics/evolution, and biogeography (distribution of species, and instances of speciation due to formations of geographical barriers). Data from all of these coincide with predictions made by evolution theory: I.e., If we look at a recently formed mountain range/valley, we predict one species that lived there would speciate on both sides of the barrier, and then it's confirmed
@Boo "evolution is simply variation of alleles in organisms"
Other evolutionist (throughout the years) claim different definitions, the definitions change all the time. The key word is "SIMPLY" There is NOTHING "simple" in any gene, cell or even a molecule. You are overlooking the fact that even a molecule is more complex than NY city and ASSUME this came about by "chance"
You are (simply) looking at God's design, finding an aspect of it, then claiming this is evolution.
@KingJamesBible Where did I state that organisms were simple? I didn't, I said evolution in terms of it's definition is quite simple. Straw man arguments won't work on me, nor do I assume anything came by by chance. I'm very deterministic. Tell me how you explain endogenous retroviruses without common ancestry please.
@Boomboxpower No, there is no evidence that anything "evolved" from a molecule.
The point is not whether an inherently unstable molecule can reformulate into another inherently unstable molecule that mimics biological replication: There is no evidence that any animal "evolved" from another since the biological species are discrete.
Lost and blind revisionists play semantic games to keep Darwin's failed hypothesis on life support. You unscientific frauds contradict the laws of thermodynamics.
@Boomboxpower Next, I suppose, you will tell me about the "Piltdown" man.
Yes, you have fallen for every Darwinist hoax in the book so far.
Did you hear about the Pope's latest miracle??
He made the dumb man blind!!
By the way, there are no "errors" in the inerrant King James Bible as an established matter of historical fact, and your Eternal Creator, the Lord God omnipotent, is fully aware of your existence. In the future, you should refrain from denying His.
Nor do I deny there is anything superior to me, on the contrary there are many things superior to me in a variety of ways. How many straw man arguments you going to set up?
Provide evidence for the existence of a hell, fail more.
@Boombxpower Don't flatter yourself since the denial of logic as a category and axiomatic reality is no more "rational" than Helen Keller or Stevie Wonder denying that the color "red" exists because they didn't see them.
There is more credible evidence of the birth, life, death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ than there is plausible evidence that a solipsist like you currently exists.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).
@jjpetkusiii Where did I deny anything logical? Nor is it an axiomatic reality, perhaps you need to look into the problems of set theory. I've already stated my position as a rationalist, not an empiricist if you can present logical validation for your stance then I will accept it, that being said it needs to be a valid logical argument.
@Boomboxpower No doctrinaire Darwinist is logical, let alone rational, since every one of you is an idle sophist capable of nothing but semantic obscurantism and knee-jerk adherence to a Bronze Age myth.
Try reading the New Testament in the inerrant King James Bible for eye-witness, contemporary sources of the ministry, birth, life, death, burial and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
"For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1:17)
@jjpetkusiii Rationalism is a philosophical position, I don't know what a Darwinist is. Like I said I'm not a sophist either, we have means to measure reality, that's contrary to sophist philosophy.
I've read the King jame version of the bible at least 4 times, there are no contemporary sources in it, none that are historically validating anything about Jesus or evidencing any miracles.
As RainhadoCanto4 wrote, "Praise God William Tyndale's prayer while being martyred by the Roman Catholic Church was answered!"
"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration" (Revelation 17:6).
"And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth" (Revelation 17:18).
Rome has always opposed the inerrant King James Bible.
@Boomboxpower I've read the atheist double-talk that you Darwinists who deny that you are Darwinists like to post before, but only the silliest try to have any rational adult believe that you read the inerrant King James "bible at least 4 times."
Once is enough for any honest reader to recognize that the New Testament texts in the AV1611 are eyewitness accounts.
Seek extensive remedial education promptly from a highly qualified tutor who specializes in narcissistic antichrist liars like you.
@jjpetkusiii No there really weren't any contemporary sources for Jesus, that's the point, that's one of the many reasons it's irrational to think said individual was divine or even existed.
Anyway, I'm done with this convo. Any observer would see your red herrings, straw mans and refusal to answer basic questions.
@Boomboxpower You are wrong again, you illiterate buffoon.
λεγει αυτω ο ιησους εγω ειμι η οδος και η αληθεια και η ζωη ουδεις ερχεται προς τον πατερα ει μη δι εμου
Dicit ei Iesus ego sum via et veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me [Iohannes 14:6]
In perfect English, those ancient Greek and Latin texts read: "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).
Trhere are no "errors" in the inerrant King James Bible.
@boggymark1 Matthew 21:7 ridiculous Jesus riding a horse and donkey, Matthew 1:17 counts the wrong number of generations, Matthew 8:14 Peter was married? and as usual Luke 24:2 and Matthew 28:2 can't agree with each other in this case as to whether or not the tomb was open.
@Boomboxpower Try learning to read, you antichrist liar.
As jacksmack77 put it, "Jesus saves. He died for you. Believe and be saved. John 1:12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. John 3:15. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
King James VI of Scotland and I of England was saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone and lived a godly life, much of it devoted to Biblical scholarship. That is basically why so many fanatical occultists, unregenerate popish Romanists, atheists, and other lost and blind heathen hate even the mention of his regal name.
As jjpetkusiii wrote, "The publication of the inerrant AV1611, commonly called the King James Bible, was the crowning event of his brilliant reign."
@Boombox As gloryboundkev wrote, "Tyrannical dictators always try to keep people from reading the Bible. People have been burned at the stake for translating the Bible accurately into languages that people can read. The Bible was outlawed from public schools in the USA in 1963, the very schools that were established to teach the Bible, and it was unconstitutional to outlaw it. Since then, the nation has been demoralized and weakened so that people will not stand up against the New World Order."
@Boomboxpower Fanaticism happens, but Rome, the great whore, has always opposed what the Son of God said.
Drunken with the blood of the saints and the martyrs of Jesus, the Mother of Harlots and Abominations murdered William Tyndale for translating the Holy Scriptures into English. The popish idolater Bloody Mary, for example, sanctioned the cruel murders of hundreds of faithful Christians, but only the Lord Jesus Christ saves sinners by grace through faith in Him, the Son of God, alone.
@Boomboxpower dude the epistles were each mans personal documentary It makes sense they would differ.Plus you need something to translate the words for you because there is no telling what Bible translation you use.You didnt mention it.Any errors are man made with translation.Do a little work and research yourself and stop thinking every time something is printed, in who knows what translation, its gonna be 100% accurate.It is noted some translations are more accurate than others.
Translated perfectly into the English, that Greek text reads, "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not" (1John 3:1).
Your asinine remarks trash valid hermeneutics and the inerrant King James Bible while they flatter the great whore, atheist.
ερευνατε τας γραφας οτι υμεις δοκειτε εν αυταις ζωην αιωνιον εχειν και εκειναι εισιν αι μαρτυρουσαι περι εμου
Translated into the inerrant King James Bible, those ancient and Greek words of the Son of God read: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me" (John 5:39).
If one refuses to believe the Holy Scriptures, then logically he will not believe the Lord Jesus Christ.
@jjpetkusiii Of course, you need to provide logical reasoning or evidence as to why we should accept said scripture. If there are no contemporary sources for Jesus then it would be blatantly retarded to accept it.
πας λογος σαπρος εκ του στοματος υμων μη εκπορευεσθω αλλ ει τις αγαθος προς οικοδομην της χρειας ινα δω χαριν τοις ακουουσιν
In perfect English, the ancient Greek reads: "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers" (Ephesians 4:29).
Of course, there are no errors in the AV1611, but when (if ever) did you come under the conviction that you are a lost sinner headed for hell?
Sadly, some apologists for Roman Catholicism are entrapped in vicious circles of its fictitious dogmas without a knowledge of sound Biblical doctrine. For example, there is no valid Scriptural basis of the presupposition--which they assert--of works that are preconditions of salvation for New Testament believers, who are in fact saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone because the Holy Bible provides no list of deeds which are required either for grace or faith.
και ει τις ουχ ευρεθη εν τη βιβλω της ζωης γεγραμμενος εβληθη εις την λιμνην του πυρος
Et qui non est inventus in libro vitae scriptus missus est in stagnum ignis
Perfectly translated into the inerrant King James Bible, those ancient Greek and Latin texts read: "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire" (Rev. 20:15)
Prepared for your father, Satan, and his angels, a lake of eternal fire awaits the unregenerate,
αμαθεστατε και κακε, αφες τον παλαιον, μη μεταποιει
(Translated into English the Greek text reads, "Fool and knave, can't you leave the old reading alone and not alter it!") The complaint of an honest scribe, it was written in the margin of Rome's corrupt Codex Vaticanus at Hebrews 1:3.
The inerrant King James Bible, translated from pure texts on the other hand, is the perfect translation of the Holy Scriptures into our common language during its Golden Age.
@boggymark1 Good points.The Massorah was actually put into place in ancient times.It was a safegaurd if you will.A numbering system,found both in the middle margins and outer margins to keep text true and without change.Now its way more compex than that but thats the just.I use a King James Companion Bible translated from those ancient scripts by people with long historys in the greek and hebrew dialect.They are kinda pricey,but worth the investment.
@Boom "evolution in terms of it's definition is quite simple"
Then your definition is misleading. the assumption that a change leading to a variation leads to a different kind of creature is an assumption with no evidence. The language of the cell from which cannot exist without intelligence has the ability to change but within LIMITS (God put in), evolution assumes there are no limits, this is not scientifically proven and is all assumption.
@Boom The study of dogs is a good example since dog studies are numereous. Small to extra large but there are limits as has been demonstrated. A dog will never be as big as an elephant, nor will it EVER turn into a DIFFERENT KIND. That's a scientic fact
@KingJamesBible What reason would a Dog need to be the size of an elephant? You need to be practical here, it's about adaptation to environment and a dog being the size of an elephant wouldn't give it any advantage. As for it never being a different kind of course not, it's been what 200 years and they've been domesticated. However if you want examples of speciation look no further than the italian wall lizard or greenish warbler.
You never did give an explanation for ERV's however.
@KingJamesBible Just because you would love it doesn't make it so nor does the dog wanting it make it so, it's about adaptation to the environment and dog's have been domesticated to the point where they don't have any natural predators. Nor would size necessarily be the mutation that allows for continuation.
ERV's are endogenous retroviruses, viruses that are inherited. Chimps and humans share over 10 ERV's.
While we are at it why do humans and Chimps share over 5 ALU elements?
@Boomboxpower and while yer at it, show me the first half human half monkey and how that evolutionary event happens every day.You cant.It doesnt happen,never has,never will.Never been any such proof.Thats why its called a theory.So you enjoy placing trust on the basis of the theroy of another persons warped decption, on how he came into existance,with absolutley no proof, rather than to take God at His word that He said He is the Creator? Thats sound judgement?
"The language of the cell from which cannot exist without intelligence"
Language? Information? Code? Intelligence?
I see you're talking about philosophy rather than biology. Nothing in the cell uses language or information.
It has been proven that nucleic acid polymeres (DNA/RNA/TNA) form naturally. In a reactor as big as Earth, with trillions of these segments forming, a small percent is bound to have a polymere sequence (gene) capable of producing proteins
@KingJamesBible really? Looking up the original data and analyzing yourself is a logical fallacy? OK maybe in your universe; in mine its called checking the fact from a primary source.
My acceptance of evolution is not based on anything other than data, your belief is based on hearsay evidence thousands of years old period. Faith is a choice and as such cannot be truth.
@Helix "evolution is not based on anything other than data"
There is no "data" that proves evoltion ever happened, ever. It goes completely against reality. All aspects of life are going down and getting worse, in the evolution model, everything is improving and getting better due to mutations, natural selection, etc. You are living in a dreamworld of you think evolution is real, it's a fantasy based on imagination and illogical assumptions.
"evolution is not based on anything other than data"
There is no "data" that proves evoltion ever happened, ever. It goes completely against reality. All aspects of life are going down and getting worse, in the evolution model, everything is improving and getting better due to mutations, natural selection, etc. You are living in a dreamworld of you think evolution is real, it's a fantasy based on imagination and illogical assumptions.
@KingJamesBible "Pubmed is an appeal to an authority. So according to you it's a "logical fallacy""
Actually, pointing to legitimate published scientific research is not an appeal to authority, because such sources document concrete experiments that anyone could replicate themselves in theory. Appeal to authority is a fallacy when you make an appeal like "Because X says Y, Y must be true". It becomes worse when X has not actually demonstrated that he is an authority.
@KingJamesBible It's not a logical fallacy to appeal to authority when all parties involved agree that the authority in question is trustworthy though. It doesn't guarantee that the conclusion is true of course(you never have that guarantee anyway when dealing with premises involving external reality) but everyone involved will agree that the conclusion is logical if the argument is otherwise valid.
@Helix The probability of evolving one molecule of iso-1-cytochrome c, a small protein common in plants and animals, is an astounding one chance in 2.3 times a trillion vigintillion. A trillion vigintillion has 75 zeros. In evolution’s terms, if a random mutation is provided every second from the alleged birth of the universe, then to date that protein molecule would be only 43% of the way to completion. That's for one molecule which is not even ONE cell.
"The probability of evolving one molecule of iso-1-cytochrome c, a small protein common in plants and animals, is an astounding one chance in 2.3 times a trillion vigintillion"
The probability of two distinct species sharing the same ERV (virus) insertion point is 1 in a number larger than there are atoms in our entire universe
So how do you explain shared ERV insertions, chromosome fusion, biogeography & molecular phylogenetic predictions without evolution?
Tell us what the probability of short RNA strands (10-100 nucleotides) folding over on themselves into complex shapes that can behave like proteins, including the protein responsible for RNA replication?
Actually just tell me whats the probability of ribozymes forming in nature? That should allow a much more quantitative answer since they already do form in nature
How long would it take for this ribozyme to find strands of RNA gene/s to produce function (life)?
@KingJamesBible Really? How do you know have you done the experiment? NO! Then there is no way to know! These calculations are just theoretical silliness. Where is the experiment!.
I love it when christians/theist use DNA for their argument. For crying out loud an atheist(s) due to his logic and reasoning is who discovered DNA. LOL.
@BigD71889 True, my point is you don't have to be christian or a theist to understand DNA. Even understanding DNA is NOT proof of a god. I didn't say they created DNA. I said discovered it. And much of their discovery was due to their logic and reasoning ability.
@HoBustinJopson Well logic and its laws are immaterial unchanging and universal. How do you account for logic, without a logical God who is immaterial unchanging and universal? Did man create logic, or was logic here before we came along? If so did man come along and change the laws of logic?
@BigD71889 Logic was here before man. But there is much man does not understand. And that is OK. What we can't do is make up answers for things we can't understand. It's best to say "IDK" or at best have "theories." Logic isn't a man living in the belly of a fish for 3 days and nights or a man putting 2 species of every land and bird animal on a boat for a year. Or maybe even thinking life began i premordial soup for some, but that is just a theory.
@HoBustinJopson Well if there is a logical immaterial unchaging and universal God, that exists outside of His creation and is not bound by its laws, then miracles such as man living in a beasts belly for 3 days and nights, and noahs ark is not that illogical. Every human has a belly button, indicating that at one point they were attached to their mother by a placenta. A child requires the union of two parents male and female. LIfe originated from two humans, so who made them?
@BigD71889 But that is my whole point. Logic tells us that if there is a god of such capabilities then he obviously is changing, not unchanging. Such miracles have not been seen in common era nor fathomed. Science and rational tell us that animals can't breath at 30,000 feet, yet the bible says the flood covered every mountain. And how did they not freeze to death? Let me guess....miracles. Like i said, science can't rely on word of mouth.
@KingJamesBible You are trying desperately to convenient the bible. Are you saying that Mt. Everest changed over 15000 feet of altitude within the last 15,000 years? I'm not a geologist, but obviously neither are you. But I listen to what geologist/science say (the people who know what they are talking about). You tell any geologists this and they will laugh at your face, in which they should.
@HoB No, it rose up AFTER the flood, as did ALL mountains (the vallys sank) and it didn't take 15,000 years. I could care less what some geologists may think, he was not there, God was and he recorded what happened
"I could care less what some geologists may think"
That's like saying I could care less what a physicist thinks when I want to know more about physics.
Do you learn math from a McDonalds fry cook, or do you learn it from someone who does math for a living? Biology, geology, paleontology, chemistry, should be no different. Don't learn about matters pertaining to the physical world from a non-scientific source.
@KingJamesBible You mean you couldn't care less (not could care less dumbass). And of course you couldn't care less because you are close minded. And as far as your claim that god was there let alone even exist you need something called evidence/proof.
Evolution is a faulty foundation and many geologists are plagued by this faulty foundation. Of course not all are, I am involved in gas and oil and the men I work with (geologists) are Bible believers and do not ascribe to the fantastic notion of the evolution religion.
To those who believe that the DNA has "evolved" rather than designed, please answer this. Is there really any scientific proof that natural processes "CAN" and "IS STILL CREATING" DNA codes from non-living matter up until this time? If none, do you not all agree that codes can only come from intelligence or an intelligent being? And a code is not a code if it has no meaning or purpose at all? All the codes of the DNA are designed with meaning and purpose, and that is to create a living organism.
As soon as a creationist explains, without using ToE, shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, 100% accurate predictions made with molecular phylogenetics where species are found in strata and locations within predicted evolutionary origins, fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, human embryonic stages that show same development as amphibians/reptiles/fish, or why all living species today can be traced back to more primitive but similar species, THEN I'll listen
@confettibrains LOL. Are you an idiot, or what? I bet you believe in junk DNA and millions-of-years, too, don't you? LOL You are just one of the militant homosexual evolutards.
@gregrutz I believe all scripture. And the flat-earth is a secular thing. Too, bad we don't live in a Torah society then all of those laws could apply and we would have a wonderful society without crime because the criminal would be taken care of. Cheers....oh, and why don't you start acting like a man for a change?
"Oh, and you are quite wrong because evolutionism does indeed hinder science"
How does evolution hinder science when it has spawned over a dozen scientific fields?
Evolution is the only theory with enough substantial evidence to be acceptable. Creation hypothesis fails to unify observed phenomena and empirical data into a theory, nor does it succeed at falsifying the evidence for evolution. Creation hypothesis has nothing except a 99% incomplete fossil record
"I bet you believe in junk DNA and millions-of-years, too, don't you?"
Hm? Junk DNA does exist. By "junk" I am referring to non-genomic DNA. The junk portion does play some role simply by changing the position of gene loci, and in fact, copying errors in the junk portion is what primarily separates us from apes, rather than new genes. Humans have very few actual genomic differences between us and the other great apes. Movement of the loci alters gene expression
Yep. We're only about 1% different, and that 1% is mostly junk DNA (insertions/copying errors/other).
Humans still belong to the great ape family. Apes express human emotions and morals, which we once thought were unique to us alone
It's foolish for theists to think they have a God-given right to dominate/abuse/subdue animals when really the only difference between us is a LAMC8 and foxp2 gene. Theists are bad for Earth
"I bet you believe in DNA and millions-of-years, too, don't you?"
Huh? You can't comprehend what a million years is? Or are you just denying the scientific evidence that our earth and universe is billions of years old?
Are you a Young-Earth Hypothesizer? Do you not believe in ice cores that show over 150k years worth of seasons? Do you not believe in nuclear physics and the laws of radioactive decay?
@confettibrains Wow, you just swallow everything, don't you? You need to do a little research about "The Lost Squadron". The WWII plains that were covered in thousands of years of ice in Greenland. And by the way, radiometric dating methods show the Earth to be quite young. The Earth is only about 6000 years old. Start being a man for a change. Don't be such a coward in this war for our souls.
Incredible beauty..... God is love.
karenlovesyahweh 5 days ago
Utterly delusional
JMKSV 1 week ago
@JMKSV Indeed you are and will no doubt be when Jesus Christ comes back
2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
KingJamesBible 1 week ago
You cant explain how these things happen so you just retreat to god as an ecuse.
ThTgUyInUrBaSmEnT 2 weeks ago
@ThTgUyInUrBaSmEnT
Actually it's the opposite. People reject what the Bible says so they make up a tale (evolution) as an excuse to reject him.
Colossians 1:16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;
KingJamesBible 2 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible so you believe a book written who knows how many years agoo? how do u know this is accurate or if it was just written by a crazy, uneducated person?
ThTgUyInUrBaSmEnT 2 weeks ago
@ThT "who knows how many years agoo?"
We know how many years ago. A good reference Bible will have the dates for when each book was written in the margin.
"it was just written by a crazy, uneducated person?"
Now your ignorance is really showing. Solomon the wisest man who ever lived wrote (penned) some of it as well as doctors and lawyers.
KingJamesBible 1 week ago
@KingJamesBible religious freaks reject evolution because they believe in a book that was written long ago when people had very little understanding of the world and how they came to be.
people created religion as a way to explain why they are here and how they got here. know we know why we are here and how we got here but religious people still believe in the writings of the people who had no idea how they came to be so reject any other explanation
smileinglasgow 1 week ago
@smile "religious freaks reject evolution"
Nothing like a broad brush stoke to claim anyone who rejects evolution is automatically a "freak" You will make an excellent New World Order slave. You already are.
KingJamesBible 1 week ago
@KingJamesBible ROFL...good point
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
@smileinglasgow dude you are so far off its completley unrealistic to put any hope or even thought into what you just said.Talk about a evolutionay stooge...wow.God said the Bible is for all times that includes the future.You believe in something that HAS NO proof and never will.Your best evolutionary experts even admit there is no proof.There is far more pointing to a real Creator ...a real God than you have in your evolution.Amazing how easily people can be deceived.
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
@KingJamesBible Good verse ! Now that sounds like some book that was written a long time ago when people had very little understanding of the world doesnt it. as stated by smileinglasgow.Sounds to me the understanding has always been there and your right.People reject God just as Christ says they will do..Man doesnt want to answer to God,therefore lets devise a theory that has no substance so we can pretend there is no God.
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
@ThTgUyInUrBaSmEnT God explained it all. You just fail to research it.You just want to retreat to a baseless theory.Hmmm sounds like something Im willing to gamble my eternity or eternal life on.Its easier for me to believe that God inspired man through His Holy Sprirt and told them what to write instead of believing in something that has no answers.Basically people just want to reject what God says in the Bible.Which isnt surprising since it tells of all that will be deceived
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
This is an excellent video. God bless you!
xCrucifyTheFleshx 2 weeks ago
@xCrucifyTheFleshx "God bless you"
-Another arrogant christian. Who are any of you to speak for god, you clearly do not fear him!
InsanityComplex1 2 weeks ago
@xCrucifyTheFleshx "God bless you!"
-Who the fuck are you to tell god what to do?
HomoSpaien78 1 week ago
@HomoSpaien78 God generally will bless those who aren't ashamed to spread his truth in this dark world.
xCrucifyTheFleshx 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xCrucifyTheFleshx "God generally will bless those who aren't ashamed to spread his truth in this dark world."
-All I see is defensiveness. Btw, it doesn't seem like christian life is very different from atheist life, why is it so critical that we turn to god?
HomoSpaien78 1 week ago
If christians cannot agree on one single interpretation of the bible, why should anybody listen to any of you?
InsanityComplex1 2 weeks ago
Interpretations belong to God (Gen. 40:8) The Holy Spirt which dwells in all believers (John 14:17) leads and guides the believer into all truth (John 16:13) The Bible tells us to compare spiritual things with spiritual (1Cor. 2:13) and it is God's words that are spiritual according to Jesus Christ "the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (John 6:63) So, we compare scripture WITH scripture with the help of the Holy Spirit can find the "intrepertation"
KingJamesBible 2 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible "Interpretations belong to God"
-So shut your fucking mouth then. Tell all of the other tens of thousands of christians sects to do the same!
We don't want to fuckin hear it from anyone.
InsanityComplex1 2 weeks ago
@Insanity No one twisted your arm to come here. No one is forcing the Bible down your throat. As the famous atheist (some claim agnostic) said:
"The Bible makes the best people in the world." - Thomas Jefferson
KingJamesBible 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KingJamesBible "No one twisted your arm to come here. "
-Well, I couldn't have stopped my parents now could I.
"No one is forcing the Bible down your throat. "
-If this were true for everyone, we wouldn't be having this argument.
InsanityComplex1 1 week ago
@InsanityComplex1 So why you come to watch a video that you already basically knew what it was going to be about.For arguments sakes or just so you could open yer poluted pie hole with that type language?.More and more i see atheists and evolutionist name calling,wanting to pick fights etc.You know you actually do a very poor job in representing your beliefs considering you use language that is frowned upon by most any sect,religion or person in general.
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Lutherblue2004 "For arguments sakes or just so you could open yer poluted pie hole with that type language?."
-What about the christians who do use "that type language"? Stop being such a big baby.
"More and more i see atheists and evolutionist name calling,wanting to pick fights etc"
-What about the christians who call everyone without faith "abominable sinners", "heathens" and so on? Not to mention the threats of eternal damnation? Yeah, you're all just perfect angels aren't you?
InsanityComplex1 1 week ago
@Lutherblue2004 "you actually do a very poor job in representing your beliefs"
-Yeah, everything's a BELIEF. There are no facts or knowledge are there? Such things are only myths.
InsanityComplex1 1 week ago
@InsanityComplex1 dude if ya want to send me a private email I have so many verses that proove God tolld of everything evolutionists have come up at least their facts part of their side thousands of years before evolution was even a thought in darwins deceived mind.If you want Ill send them.DNA TIME SPACE MATTER, SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM.PROCESS OF UNIVERSAL DECAY etc.BTW , 2nd law of thermodynamics wasnt even doscovered until the 1800's an is a MONUMENTAL embarrassment to evo's
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
Yes Ive been convinced for a lil bit we are intetelgent designed
NOT BY GOD that's the reason people don't take this serious is because these still some what I gnarly minds falling to religion an trying to converge them u can prove DNA is Intellegently Designed you cant have stable proof of the "father of Jesus Christ as the ruler of the universe "
Theses simple minds needa quite jumping into their personal beleifs of the "GOD"
The only god we worship is ourselves and the surroundings around
chriscanono 2 weeks ago
Amen! Genesis 1:1
rmbbuyer 3 weeks ago
All scientific logic points to a Creator. There's nothing scientific about the theory that an extremely complex program such a DNA just came into being by chance. An explosion in a car factory will never produce a Rolls-Royce.
Galacticavatar 3 weeks ago
God can suck my dick
PilotDownhill 4 weeks ago
@PilotDownhill Are you schizophrenic?
hErzblt 3 weeks ago
@PilotDownhill yea and when yer standing in front of Him after yer dead in this life I wonder if that will be your plead at that time.You must be what 13 maybe?
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A question for the ID proponent.
If something is so complex that it must require a designer (which I understand is the basic tenet of ID), and the example of, say, DNA is used to make the point, then there must also exist something so simple that it DOESN`T require a designer. If there isn`t such simplicity, then the word complex has no meaning, because everything then is complex, and therefore everything requires a designer. It`s circular.
So, challenge: Give an example of such simplicity.
RationalThinker1859 1 month ago
Holy, Holy, Holy, and Glory, Glory, Glory is manifest in YHWH and His Son, the LAMB! Thank you Father for making me, growing me, teaching me, and loving me...Thank You!!!
MuchTooLearnUSH 1 month ago
God is amazing!
justcallmesolo 1 month ago
I believe but I wish I had 12 inch rod DNA
lynnethc 1 month ago
@lynnethc Proverbs 26:3 A whip for the horse, a bridle for the ass, and a rod for the fool's back.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
Allah Akbar! God is great!
Sofia0527 1 month ago
@Sofia0527 Job 36:26 Behold, God is great, and we know him not, neither can the number of his years be searched out.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If creation hypothesis can unify the observed facts we base evolution theory on, then their hypothesis might be upgraded to the theory status. MIGHT. But probably not though since all knowledge of chemistry and biology shows everything we see is a matter of simple physical laws of atoms. For creation hypothesis to be true, then chemical affinity and brownian motion cannot exist. There can be no electromagnetic force. Because with these, life is entirely possible, even unavoidable if all is there
confettibrains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Creation hypothesis also fails to explain observed genetic mutations. Do they honestly think God is manipulating the DNA molecule of pathogens right in front of us?
And they fail to show us the chemistry that says the DNA/RNA/TNA/GNA molecule cannot change. Do creationists think the nucleotides that make up bad mutations are any different than nucleotides that make beneficial mutations? Do creationists think gene copying errors is an act of God, or simply gene replication errors?
confettibrains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Creation hypothesis fails to properly explain facts like shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, accurate predictions made by molecular phylogenetics, biogeography (species are found in strata age and locations at predicted evolutionary origins), fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, comparative embryology that shows vestigial gene expression of previous life, or why ALL living species today can be traced back to a predecessor (NO completely novel organisms)
confettibrains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
People need to stop taking ancient mythology seriously. You don't see adults dressing up like wizards after they read Harry Potter and firmly believing there's magical entities in the world. Just because the mythology is 3,000-4,000 years old literature doesn't make it any less pathetic.
confettibrains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It's mind boggling to see how much science one must deny to hold onto bronze-age mythological belief. Normally, when people are proven wrong they don't continue holding onto false knowledge. When children learn 2 + 2 doesn't equal 5 you don't see them continuing to say it does. Or even if they did, that's ok, they're just children. It's not okay when adults are shown mountains of incontestable evidence that independently confirm an explanation, like plots in a story converging into one picture.
confettibrains 1 month ago
This video has many flaws, but in essence the logical fallacy the scientists are making is as follows - "DNA is too complex for anything we currently know is possible -therefore god must have did it". When you ask -"How did god come about?" -You get a wishy washy answer (Not answered in this video) like "He is eternal". Why not say matter has always been here i.e. eternal? And how does that answer how he was "created" if he wasnt created - he couldnt have come from "nothing" right?Nobody knows!
MrDevilstreaker 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When I see creationists attempt to understand science, I see people who are self-conscious about blindly believing in bronze-age mythology. We all know religion is fucking stupid when we actually think about it for 2 seconds, but some people block that out as if it's bad to know the truth about life and the cosmos. The science is actually far more amazing and inspiring than the most fantastic stories taught in religion, when you truly understand it
confettibrains 1 month ago
Francis Crick: "Christianity may be OK between consenting adults in private but should not be taught to young children."
gburu2004 1 month ago
@gburu2004 That's why we have private schools where parents can send there children to a place where the Christian beliefs are similar. Same thing should go for evolution. It should not be taught in public schools, but rather a private school. It is not science, because science deals with hard facts which evolution is not, hence the word theory.
BaylorBear1028 1 month ago
@gburu Joseph Mastropaolo B.S., M.S., Ph.D:
"evolutionism is the exact opposite of reality, the exact opposite of the laws of physics, an inverted fantasy based on infinite miracles never observed or experimentally verified. It fulfills the definition of a religion"
This fantasy should not be taught to ADULTS, let alone "children"
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KingJamesBible
"evolutionism is the exact opposite of reality, the exact opposite of the laws of physics, an inverted fantasy based on infinite miracles never observed"
LOL, and of course he can't refute the evidence. All he can do is fling his shitty opinion around and flaunt his fake college degree to make him sound credible.
Evolution is one of the most well supported and well documented theories in science. And it HAS been observed.
Joseph is such a fucking idiot
confettibrains 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible Really You're using the logical fallacy of appeal to an authority? SHOW me the evidence! There are over ten thousand journal articles containing data that contradicts your quote statement! All you have to do is a pubmed search and read.
Helixbuilder 1 month ago
@Hel " You're using the logical fallacy of appeal to an authority"
Show me the evidence that evolution is science. Pubmed is an appeal to an authority. So according to you it's a "logical fallacy"
Evolution is a religion, it's not science.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KingJamesBible
"Show me the evidence that evolution is science"
Try the wikipedia page on evolution along with their page of supporting evidence. Look at the bottom of the page for citations to biologists/scientific journals
"Evolution is a religion, it's not science"
Religion = belief in divinity or supernatural entities with faith instead of evidence
Look on google for "scientific evidence for evolution" and "empirical data evolution"
Avoid biased sites like jesus4u@org
confettibrains 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible I think we've been over this before, not entirely sure.
You have a straw man idea of what evolution is, evolution is simply variation of alleles in organisms. That's why speciation, mutations, adaptation, natural selection, common ancestry etc. Are all under the heading of evolution, these are sub categories. Now I assume you have nothing wrong with any of them except for perhaps common ancestry.
For common ancestry I suggest you look into Endogenous retro viruses.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower
"For common ancestry I suggest you look into Endogenous retro viruses"
And molecular phylogenetics/evolution, and biogeography (distribution of species, and instances of speciation due to formations of geographical barriers). Data from all of these coincide with predictions made by evolution theory: I.e., If we look at a recently formed mountain range/valley, we predict one species that lived there would speciate on both sides of the barrier, and then it's confirmed
confettibrains 1 month ago
@confettibrains nicely put.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower You can try to translate this into English. After you fail, troll, I can easily tell you why you got it wrong.
ως δε επορευοντο κατα την οδον ηλθον επι τι υδωρ και φησιν ο ευνουχος ιδου υδωρ τι κωλυει με βαπτισθηναι
ειπεν δε ο φιλιππος ει πιστευεις εξ ολης της καρδιας εξεστιν αποκριθεις δε ειπεν πιστευω τον υιον του θεου ειναι τον ιησουν χριστον
και εκελευσεν στηναι το αρμα και κατεβησαν αμφοτεροι εις το υδωρ ο τε φιλιππος και ο ευνουχος και εβαπτισεν αυτον
boggymark1 1 month ago
@Boo "evolution is simply variation of alleles in organisms"
Other evolutionist (throughout the years) claim different definitions, the definitions change all the time. The key word is "SIMPLY" There is NOTHING "simple" in any gene, cell or even a molecule. You are overlooking the fact that even a molecule is more complex than NY city and ASSUME this came about by "chance"
You are (simply) looking at God's design, finding an aspect of it, then claiming this is evolution.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible Where did I state that organisms were simple? I didn't, I said evolution in terms of it's definition is quite simple. Straw man arguments won't work on me, nor do I assume anything came by by chance. I'm very deterministic. Tell me how you explain endogenous retroviruses without common ancestry please.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower No, there is no evidence that anything "evolved" from a molecule.
The point is not whether an inherently unstable molecule can reformulate into another inherently unstable molecule that mimics biological replication: There is no evidence that any animal "evolved" from another since the biological species are discrete.
Lost and blind revisionists play semantic games to keep Darwin's failed hypothesis on life support. You unscientific frauds contradict the laws of thermodynamics.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii You first of all need to know the definition of species, go look at the Italian wall lizard or greenish warbler.
Nor does it contradict the laws of thermodynamics, present your argument.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower Next, I suppose, you will tell me about the "Piltdown" man.
Yes, you have fallen for every Darwinist hoax in the book so far.
Did you hear about the Pope's latest miracle??
He made the dumb man blind!!
By the way, there are no "errors" in the inerrant King James Bible as an established matter of historical fact, and your Eternal Creator, the Lord God omnipotent, is fully aware of your existence. In the future, you should refrain from denying His.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii Omnipotence paradox = your argument destroyed. Nice to know you ignored my last comment however.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower Nonsense. You are evidently a solipsist, and too bad for you.
You are limited indeed to such an extent that you deny the very possibility that anything or anyone is superior to you. Clearly, you are wrong.
When--if ever--did you come under the conviction that you are a lost sinner on your way to hell?
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii Nope, rationalist.
Nor do I deny there is anything superior to me, on the contrary there are many things superior to me in a variety of ways. How many straw man arguments you going to set up?
Provide evidence for the existence of a hell, fail more.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boombxpower Don't flatter yourself since the denial of logic as a category and axiomatic reality is no more "rational" than Helen Keller or Stevie Wonder denying that the color "red" exists because they didn't see them.
There is more credible evidence of the birth, life, death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ than there is plausible evidence that a solipsist like you currently exists.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii Where did I deny anything logical? Nor is it an axiomatic reality, perhaps you need to look into the problems of set theory. I've already stated my position as a rationalist, not an empiricist if you can present logical validation for your stance then I will accept it, that being said it needs to be a valid logical argument.
Give me one contemporary source for Jesus, one.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower No doctrinaire Darwinist is logical, let alone rational, since every one of you is an idle sophist capable of nothing but semantic obscurantism and knee-jerk adherence to a Bronze Age myth.
Try reading the New Testament in the inerrant King James Bible for eye-witness, contemporary sources of the ministry, birth, life, death, burial and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
"For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ" (John 1:17)
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii Rationalism is a philosophical position, I don't know what a Darwinist is. Like I said I'm not a sophist either, we have means to measure reality, that's contrary to sophist philosophy.
I've read the King jame version of the bible at least 4 times, there are no contemporary sources in it, none that are historically validating anything about Jesus or evidencing any miracles.
Your belief is unfounded.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower No.
As RainhadoCanto4 wrote, "Praise God William Tyndale's prayer while being martyred by the Roman Catholic Church was answered!"
"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration" (Revelation 17:6).
"And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth" (Revelation 17:18).
Rome has always opposed the inerrant King James Bible.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower I've read the atheist double-talk that you Darwinists who deny that you are Darwinists like to post before, but only the silliest try to have any rational adult believe that you read the inerrant King James "bible at least 4 times."
Once is enough for any honest reader to recognize that the New Testament texts in the AV1611 are eyewitness accounts.
Seek extensive remedial education promptly from a highly qualified tutor who specializes in narcissistic antichrist liars like you.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii No there really weren't any contemporary sources for Jesus, that's the point, that's one of the many reasons it's irrational to think said individual was divine or even existed.
Anyway, I'm done with this convo. Any observer would see your red herrings, straw mans and refusal to answer basic questions.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower You are wrong again, you illiterate buffoon.
λεγει αυτω ο ιησους εγω ειμι η οδος και η αληθεια και η ζωη ουδεις ερχεται προς τον πατερα ει μη δι εμου
Dicit ei Iesus ego sum via et veritas et vita nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me [Iohannes 14:6]
In perfect English, those ancient Greek and Latin texts read: "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6).
Trhere are no "errors" in the inerrant King James Bible.
boggymark1 1 month ago
@boggymark1 Matthew 21:7 ridiculous Jesus riding a horse and donkey, Matthew 1:17 counts the wrong number of generations, Matthew 8:14 Peter was married? and as usual Luke 24:2 and Matthew 28:2 can't agree with each other in this case as to whether or not the tomb was open.
Don't kid yourself, there are many errors.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower Try learning to read, you antichrist liar.
As jacksmack77 put it, "Jesus saves. He died for you. Believe and be saved. John 1:12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. John 3:15. That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
boggymark1 1 month ago
@Boomer
King James VI of Scotland and I of England was saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone and lived a godly life, much of it devoted to Biblical scholarship. That is basically why so many fanatical occultists, unregenerate popish Romanists, atheists, and other lost and blind heathen hate even the mention of his regal name.
As jjpetkusiii wrote, "The publication of the inerrant AV1611, commonly called the King James Bible, was the crowning event of his brilliant reign."
boggymark1 1 month ago
@Boombox As gloryboundkev wrote, "Tyrannical dictators always try to keep people from reading the Bible. People have been burned at the stake for translating the Bible accurately into languages that people can read. The Bible was outlawed from public schools in the USA in 1963, the very schools that were established to teach the Bible, and it was unconstitutional to outlaw it. Since then, the nation has been demoralized and weakened so that people will not stand up against the New World Order."
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii People have also been burned at the stake for not believing it, the tyrannical dictatorship that was medieval Vatican.
Boomboxpower 3 weeks ago
@Boomboxpower Fanaticism happens, but Rome, the great whore, has always opposed what the Son of God said.
Drunken with the blood of the saints and the martyrs of Jesus, the Mother of Harlots and Abominations murdered William Tyndale for translating the Holy Scriptures into English. The popish idolater Bloody Mary, for example, sanctioned the cruel murders of hundreds of faithful Christians, but only the Lord Jesus Christ saves sinners by grace through faith in Him, the Son of God, alone.
jjpetkusiii 3 weeks ago
@Boomboxpower dude the epistles were each mans personal documentary It makes sense they would differ.Plus you need something to translate the words for you because there is no telling what Bible translation you use.You didnt mention it.Any errors are man made with translation.Do a little work and research yourself and stop thinking every time something is printed, in who knows what translation, its gonna be 100% accurate.It is noted some translations are more accurate than others.
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
@Bmboxpoer
ιδετε ποταπην αγαπην δεδωκεν ημιν ο πατηρ ινα τεκνα θεου κληθωμεν δια τουτο ο κοσμος ου γινωσκει ημας οτι ουκ εγνω αυτον
Translated perfectly into the English, that Greek text reads, "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not" (1John 3:1).
Your asinine remarks trash valid hermeneutics and the inerrant King James Bible while they flatter the great whore, atheist.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower
ερευνατε τας γραφας οτι υμεις δοκειτε εν αυταις ζωην αιωνιον εχειν και εκειναι εισιν αι μαρτυρουσαι περι εμου
Translated into the inerrant King James Bible, those ancient and Greek words of the Son of God read: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me" (John 5:39).
If one refuses to believe the Holy Scriptures, then logically he will not believe the Lord Jesus Christ.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii Of course, you need to provide logical reasoning or evidence as to why we should accept said scripture. If there are no contemporary sources for Jesus then it would be blatantly retarded to accept it.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower
πας λογος σαπρος εκ του στοματος υμων μη εκπορευεσθω αλλ ει τις αγαθος προς οικοδομην της χρειας ινα δω χαριν τοις ακουουσιν
In perfect English, the ancient Greek reads: "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers" (Ephesians 4:29).
Of course, there are no errors in the AV1611, but when (if ever) did you come under the conviction that you are a lost sinner headed for hell?
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@jjpetkusiii Again, provide evidence for hell.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower
Sadly, some apologists for Roman Catholicism are entrapped in vicious circles of its fictitious dogmas without a knowledge of sound Biblical doctrine. For example, there is no valid Scriptural basis of the presupposition--which they assert--of works that are preconditions of salvation for New Testament believers, who are in fact saved by grace through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone because the Holy Bible provides no list of deeds which are required either for grace or faith.
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@Boombox Are you having a bad day?
και ει τις ουχ ευρεθη εν τη βιβλω της ζωης γεγραμμενος εβληθη εις την λιμνην του πυρος
Et qui non est inventus in libro vitae scriptus missus est in stagnum ignis
Perfectly translated into the inerrant King James Bible, those ancient Greek and Latin texts read: "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire" (Rev. 20:15)
Prepared for your father, Satan, and his angels, a lake of eternal fire awaits the unregenerate,
jjpetkusiii 1 month ago
@Boomboxpower
αμαθεστατε και κακε, αφες τον παλαιον, μη μεταποιει
(Translated into English the Greek text reads, "Fool and knave, can't you leave the old reading alone and not alter it!") The complaint of an honest scribe, it was written in the margin of Rome's corrupt Codex Vaticanus at Hebrews 1:3.
The inerrant King James Bible, translated from pure texts on the other hand, is the perfect translation of the Holy Scriptures into our common language during its Golden Age.
boggymark1 1 month ago
@boggymark1 Good points.The Massorah was actually put into place in ancient times.It was a safegaurd if you will.A numbering system,found both in the middle margins and outer margins to keep text true and without change.Now its way more compex than that but thats the just.I use a King James Companion Bible translated from those ancient scripts by people with long historys in the greek and hebrew dialect.They are kinda pricey,but worth the investment.
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
@Boom "evolution in terms of it's definition is quite simple"
Then your definition is misleading. the assumption that a change leading to a variation leads to a different kind of creature is an assumption with no evidence. The language of the cell from which cannot exist without intelligence has the ability to change but within LIMITS (God put in), evolution assumes there are no limits, this is not scientifically proven and is all assumption.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible Of course it assumes there are no limits, because limits have not been demonstrated. Demonstrate the limits of variation please.
Boomboxpower 1 month ago
@Boom The study of dogs is a good example since dog studies are numereous. Small to extra large but there are limits as has been demonstrated. A dog will never be as big as an elephant, nor will it EVER turn into a DIFFERENT KIND. That's a scientic fact
KingJamesBible 3 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible What reason would a Dog need to be the size of an elephant? You need to be practical here, it's about adaptation to environment and a dog being the size of an elephant wouldn't give it any advantage. As for it never being a different kind of course not, it's been what 200 years and they've been domesticated. However if you want examples of speciation look no further than the italian wall lizard or greenish warbler.
You never did give an explanation for ERV's however.
Boomboxpower 3 weeks ago
@Boo "What reason would a Dog need to be the size of an elephant?"
I would love to have a domesticated dog this size. It would be even better protection on my property and against HIS predators.
ERV ?
KingJamesBible 3 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible Just because you would love it doesn't make it so nor does the dog wanting it make it so, it's about adaptation to the environment and dog's have been domesticated to the point where they don't have any natural predators. Nor would size necessarily be the mutation that allows for continuation.
ERV's are endogenous retroviruses, viruses that are inherited. Chimps and humans share over 10 ERV's.
While we are at it why do humans and Chimps share over 5 ALU elements?
Boomboxpower 3 weeks ago
@Boom "they don't have any natural predators"
You must live in a (place) country where dogs are not eaten, they are, and in MORE places on earth than not.
"ERV's are endogenous retroviruses, viruses that are inherited" Inherited? Where's the proof for this?
KingJamesBible 2 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible But the species continues right? Take the whole argument rather than cherry picking.
In regards to the ERV's sure, HIV and HTLV are examples.
Boomboxpower 2 weeks ago
@Boomboxpower and while yer at it, show me the first half human half monkey and how that evolutionary event happens every day.You cant.It doesnt happen,never has,never will.Never been any such proof.Thats why its called a theory.So you enjoy placing trust on the basis of the theroy of another persons warped decption, on how he came into existance,with absolutley no proof, rather than to take God at His word that He said He is the Creator? Thats sound judgement?
Lutherblue2004 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KingJamesBible
"The language of the cell from which cannot exist without intelligence"
Language? Information? Code? Intelligence?
I see you're talking about philosophy rather than biology. Nothing in the cell uses language or information.
It has been proven that nucleic acid polymeres (DNA/RNA/TNA) form naturally. In a reactor as big as Earth, with trillions of these segments forming, a small percent is bound to have a polymere sequence (gene) capable of producing proteins
confettibrains 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible really? Looking up the original data and analyzing yourself is a logical fallacy? OK maybe in your universe; in mine its called checking the fact from a primary source.
My acceptance of evolution is not based on anything other than data, your belief is based on hearsay evidence thousands of years old period. Faith is a choice and as such cannot be truth.
Helixbuilder 1 month ago
@Helix "evolution is not based on anything other than data"
There is no "data" that proves evoltion ever happened, ever. It goes completely against reality. All aspects of life are going down and getting worse, in the evolution model, everything is improving and getting better due to mutations, natural selection, etc. You are living in a dreamworld of you think evolution is real, it's a fantasy based on imagination and illogical assumptions.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
"evolution is not based on anything other than data"
There is no "data" that proves evoltion ever happened, ever. It goes completely against reality. All aspects of life are going down and getting worse, in the evolution model, everything is improving and getting better due to mutations, natural selection, etc. You are living in a dreamworld of you think evolution is real, it's a fantasy based on imagination and illogical assumptions.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible youre real dumb
PilotDownhill 3 weeks ago
@Pilot and you're going to hell
Psalms 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell,..
KingJamesBible 3 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible turned into hell? so im going to become hell?
PilotDownhill 3 weeks ago
@Pilot "Turned in"
....as in turn in your badge, you're fired!
KingJamesBible 2 weeks ago
@KingJamesBible "Pubmed is an appeal to an authority. So according to you it's a "logical fallacy""
Actually, pointing to legitimate published scientific research is not an appeal to authority, because such sources document concrete experiments that anyone could replicate themselves in theory. Appeal to authority is a fallacy when you make an appeal like "Because X says Y, Y must be true". It becomes worse when X has not actually demonstrated that he is an authority.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnom " such sources document concrete experiments"
wonderful, now produce one "document concrete experiment" that proves evolution is science and that it happened, is happening or will ever happen.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible It's not a logical fallacy to appeal to authority when all parties involved agree that the authority in question is trustworthy though. It doesn't guarantee that the conclusion is true of course(you never have that guarantee anyway when dealing with premises involving external reality) but everyone involved will agree that the conclusion is logical if the argument is otherwise valid.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
The fool hath said in his heart there is no God.
menmybaby4307 1 month ago
Just saying something is impossible is an opinion. Where is the experimental data to support this nonsense?
Helixbuilder 1 month ago
@Helix The probability of evolving one molecule of iso-1-cytochrome c, a small protein common in plants and animals, is an astounding one chance in 2.3 times a trillion vigintillion. A trillion vigintillion has 75 zeros. In evolution’s terms, if a random mutation is provided every second from the alleged birth of the universe, then to date that protein molecule would be only 43% of the way to completion. That's for one molecule which is not even ONE cell.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible
"The probability of evolving one molecule of iso-1-cytochrome c, a small protein common in plants and animals, is an astounding one chance in 2.3 times a trillion vigintillion"
The probability of two distinct species sharing the same ERV (virus) insertion point is 1 in a number larger than there are atoms in our entire universe
So how do you explain shared ERV insertions, chromosome fusion, biogeography & molecular phylogenetic predictions without evolution?
confettibrains 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible
Tell us what the probability of short RNA strands (10-100 nucleotides) folding over on themselves into complex shapes that can behave like proteins, including the protein responsible for RNA replication?
Actually just tell me whats the probability of ribozymes forming in nature? That should allow a much more quantitative answer since they already do form in nature
How long would it take for this ribozyme to find strands of RNA gene/s to produce function (life)?
confettibrains 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible Really? How do you know have you done the experiment? NO! Then there is no way to know! These calculations are just theoretical silliness. Where is the experiment!.
Helixbuilder 1 month ago
@Helix No more than you have, but I can read and I can read what those have done that I cannot.
You can borrow brains, but you can't borrow character - B. Jones founder of B.J. University
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
I love it when christians/theist use DNA for their argument. For crying out loud an atheist(s) due to his logic and reasoning is who discovered DNA. LOL.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
@HoBustinJopson who discovered it has absoltely nothing to do with who Made it
BigD71889 1 month ago
@BigD71889 True, my point is you don't have to be christian or a theist to understand DNA. Even understanding DNA is NOT proof of a god. I didn't say they created DNA. I said discovered it. And much of their discovery was due to their logic and reasoning ability.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
@HoBustinJopson Well logic and its laws are immaterial unchanging and universal. How do you account for logic, without a logical God who is immaterial unchanging and universal? Did man create logic, or was logic here before we came along? If so did man come along and change the laws of logic?
BigD71889 1 month ago
@BigD71889 Logic was here before man. But there is much man does not understand. And that is OK. What we can't do is make up answers for things we can't understand. It's best to say "IDK" or at best have "theories." Logic isn't a man living in the belly of a fish for 3 days and nights or a man putting 2 species of every land and bird animal on a boat for a year. Or maybe even thinking life began i premordial soup for some, but that is just a theory.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
@HoBustinJopson Well if there is a logical immaterial unchaging and universal God, that exists outside of His creation and is not bound by its laws, then miracles such as man living in a beasts belly for 3 days and nights, and noahs ark is not that illogical. Every human has a belly button, indicating that at one point they were attached to their mother by a placenta. A child requires the union of two parents male and female. LIfe originated from two humans, so who made them?
BigD71889 1 month ago
@BigD71889 But that is my whole point. Logic tells us that if there is a god of such capabilities then he obviously is changing, not unchanging. Such miracles have not been seen in common era nor fathomed. Science and rational tell us that animals can't breath at 30,000 feet, yet the bible says the flood covered every mountain. And how did they not freeze to death? Let me guess....miracles. Like i said, science can't rely on word of mouth.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
@Ho You assume that the mountains at that time were the same height they are today. That's is not the case, so your point is stricken down.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible You are trying desperately to convenient the bible. Are you saying that Mt. Everest changed over 15000 feet of altitude within the last 15,000 years? I'm not a geologist, but obviously neither are you. But I listen to what geologist/science say (the people who know what they are talking about). You tell any geologists this and they will laugh at your face, in which they should.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
@HoB No, it rose up AFTER the flood, as did ALL mountains (the vallys sank) and it didn't take 15,000 years. I could care less what some geologists may think, he was not there, God was and he recorded what happened
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KingJamesBible
"I could care less what some geologists may think"
That's like saying I could care less what a physicist thinks when I want to know more about physics.
Do you learn math from a McDonalds fry cook, or do you learn it from someone who does math for a living? Biology, geology, paleontology, chemistry, should be no different. Don't learn about matters pertaining to the physical world from a non-scientific source.
confettibrains 1 month ago
@KingJamesBible You mean you couldn't care less (not could care less dumbass). And of course you couldn't care less because you are close minded. And as far as your claim that god was there let alone even exist you need something called evidence/proof.
HoBustinJopson 1 month ago
@Ho I could not care less. better now?
Evolution is a faulty foundation and many geologists are plagued by this faulty foundation. Of course not all are, I am involved in gas and oil and the men I work with (geologists) are Bible believers and do not ascribe to the fantastic notion of the evolution religion.
KingJamesBible 1 month ago
Hehe.. oh man.. yeah, if you look really close you can actually see a little "a, t, c and g" printed on every gene..
Completely Blinkered as to what both "Code" and "Proof" even are.
GawdSwill 1 month ago
Thank you so much for these amazing videos
namrepus4 1 month ago
To those who believe that the DNA has "evolved" rather than designed, please answer this. Is there really any scientific proof that natural processes "CAN" and "IS STILL CREATING" DNA codes from non-living matter up until this time? If none, do you not all agree that codes can only come from intelligence or an intelligent being? And a code is not a code if it has no meaning or purpose at all? All the codes of the DNA are designed with meaning and purpose, and that is to create a living organism.
eduardtube1980 1 month ago
I love these videos that expose evolution for the idiocy that it is. One must be a total dolt to believe in evolution.
thechessstick 1 month ago
@thechessstick IC and ID lost in court, proven to be creationism.
Evolution is taught as fact.
gregrutz 1 month ago
@gregrutz Bwawk, bwawk, Greg want a cracker, Bwawk, bwawk. LOL
thechessstick 1 month ago
Life is amazing, what a God we have.
HolyRevelation 1 month ago
@HolyRevelation ''what a God we have'' Don't you mean God's? Every religion has a different story and a differnt creator God.
gregrutz 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And when a creationist can explain observed instances of speciation without using the ToE.
Do they really think God is going into plants, into microbes, into organisms while we are OBSERVING them, and altering their DNA?
confettibrains 1 month ago
Comment removed
coyoteself 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As soon as a creationist explains, without using ToE, shared ERV insertions between distinct but related species, 100% accurate predictions made with molecular phylogenetics where species are found in strata and locations within predicted evolutionary origins, fusion of 2 ape chromosomes into 1 human chromosome, human embryonic stages that show same development as amphibians/reptiles/fish, or why all living species today can be traced back to more primitive but similar species, THEN I'll listen
confettibrains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@confettibrains This is NOT Spam, it's just an opinion someone else is trying to hide
coyoteself 1 month ago
@confettibrains LOL. Are you an idiot, or what? I bet you believe in junk DNA and millions-of-years, too, don't you? LOL You are just one of the militant homosexual evolutards.
thechessstick 1 month ago
@thechessstick And you think we all came off a boat, talking snakes, the earth is flat and 6000 years old, dinosaurs ate grass and...
- If you work on a Sabbath, you should be killed [Exodus 31:15]
- If your son disobeys you, murder him [Deut 21:18 -21]
- Sell your daughter into slavery to pay the bills [Exodus 21:7]
- If your children curse you, kill them [Lev. 20:9]
- Women are subservient, they must remain silent [1 Tim 2:11-12]
- Slaves must perform any act you wish [Titus 2:9]
gregrutz 1 month ago
@gregrutz I believe all scripture. And the flat-earth is a secular thing. Too, bad we don't live in a Torah society then all of those laws could apply and we would have a wonderful society without crime because the criminal would be taken care of. Cheers....oh, and why don't you start acting like a man for a change?
thechessstick 1 month ago
@thechessstick Lucky I live in a free country where science is not hindered by religion and IDiots like you.
gregrutz 1 month ago
@gregrutz It will be as soon as Islam takes over. Oh, and you are quite wrong because evolutionism does indeed hinder science.
thechessstick 1 month ago
@thechessstick Fuck Islam.
gregrutz 1 month ago
@thechessstick
"Oh, and you are quite wrong because evolutionism does indeed hinder science"
How does evolution hinder science when it has spawned over a dozen scientific fields?
Evolution is the only theory with enough substantial evidence to be acceptable. Creation hypothesis fails to unify observed phenomena and empirical data into a theory, nor does it succeed at falsifying the evidence for evolution. Creation hypothesis has nothing except a 99% incomplete fossil record
confettibrains 1 month ago
@thechessstick
"I bet you believe in junk DNA and millions-of-years, too, don't you?"
Hm? Junk DNA does exist. By "junk" I am referring to non-genomic DNA. The junk portion does play some role simply by changing the position of gene loci, and in fact, copying errors in the junk portion is what primarily separates us from apes, rather than new genes. Humans have very few actual genomic differences between us and the other great apes. Movement of the loci alters gene expression
confettibrains 1 month ago
@confettibrains Wow, that is what separates us from apes?! LOL
thechessstick 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thechessstick
"Wow that is what separates us from apes"
Yep. We're only about 1% different, and that 1% is mostly junk DNA (insertions/copying errors/other).
Humans still belong to the great ape family. Apes express human emotions and morals, which we once thought were unique to us alone
It's foolish for theists to think they have a God-given right to dominate/abuse/subdue animals when really the only difference between us is a LAMC8 and foxp2 gene. Theists are bad for Earth
confettibrains 1 month ago
@thechessstick
"I bet you believe in DNA and millions-of-years, too, don't you?"
Huh? You can't comprehend what a million years is? Or are you just denying the scientific evidence that our earth and universe is billions of years old?
Are you a Young-Earth Hypothesizer? Do you not believe in ice cores that show over 150k years worth of seasons? Do you not believe in nuclear physics and the laws of radioactive decay?
confettibrains 1 month ago
@confettibrains Wow, you just swallow everything, don't you? You need to do a little research about "The Lost Squadron". The WWII plains that were covered in thousands of years of ice in Greenland. And by the way, radiometric dating methods show the Earth to be quite young. The Earth is only about 6000 years old. Start being a man for a change. Don't be such a coward in this war for our souls.
thechessstick 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thechessstick
"And by the way, radiometric dating methods show the Earth to be quite young"
Nope. Try learning real science that doesn't come from creationist websites.
All radioactive analysis shows the earth to be really fucking old. And they can each independently confirm one another.
While you're learning about physics, plz learn biology too.
confettibrains 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DNA is not a program, it is not a code, it is not information. All this etiquette is just an easier way for homo sapien primates to interpret DNA.
Genetic mutation is empirically observed. It is incontestable that DNA is NOT static, and is subject to change via several known ways.
confettibrains 1 month ago
Comment removed
coyoteself 1 month ago
Who said DNA was designed? The markers in DNA and the Code itself would not be the way it is unless evolution was true.
gregrutz 1 month ago
@gregrutz "The markers in DNA and the Code itself would not be the way it is unless evolution was true."
This can be put in the definition of "Faulty presumptous logic"
KingJamesBible 1 month ago