cut out your bullshit and trivial nitpicking on details.. you know it's true that most of christians believe the Earth is 6000yrs old. even if they didn't, almost all of them are against the Evolution Theory. they, the majority, don't even approve your point of view, and you as a christian. so in fact, you aren't even a christian and aren't entitled to in anyway whatsoever to present your views as legitimate christian views. you can't customize religion, it just doesn't work that way
It isn't trivial that you say the Bible says something (age of the earth) when it doesn't. Few Christians I know think the earth is 6,000 years old. I don't know what a scientific survey would say, but there is wide variety in Christian beliefs on non-biblical topics like this one. From what I have seen strict Young Earth Creationists are a minority, though a large one. You also had the idea that the 6,000 date was from the beginning of Christianity, when it is actually on 400 or so years old.
a surevey from Newsweek showed that 91%of Americans believed there is God and 87% believed Evolution is not true. What does this tell you blockhead? ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE.
them believing the Earth is 6000yrs old is just ONE reason. there are plenty more verses that contradict the evolution theory.
but most importantly, bible doesn't mention evolution
Many people who do not believe in evolution do not think the earth is 6000 years old. The 2 are completely seperate issues. If asked that way, I would express doubts about some aspects of evolutionary theory, yet I believe the earth much older than 6,000 years.
are you an idiot? i just SAID their belief that the earth is 6000yrsold is only a PART of the reason why they reject evolution. there r more comprehensive set of reasons along w/ that why christians reject evolution. it doesn't MATTER if YOU believe against the majority of christian beliefs.
the point here is that ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE. how many more times do u want me to restate that or are u merely too stupid to understand a simple proposition?
"are you an idiot? i just SAID their belief that the earth is 6000yrsold is only a PART of the reason why they reject evolution"
I am saying that many reject evolution who do not believe in a 6000 yrs old Earth. You have the two linked when it is for some people and isn't for others. Even someone who thinks the earth is quite old can point to problems in the Cambrian explosion time period.
whoosh~!! there you again my point flyng right over your head. i think talking to a deaf person may be actually easier. what does it mean to you when i CAPITALIZE certain words?
let me repeat so i may hear it flying right over your head again.
ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE.
did you understand that? or are capitalized words not displayed on your computer monitor?
if the former is the case, just refute on that point, otherwise i'm outta here.
"JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU BELIEVE IN A 6,000 YEAR OLD EARTH."
i never said it does. you keep repeating that like a mantra.
for the thousandth time, i repeat, my point is ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE.
but i will not expect you to get it this time either, because you are apparently retarded. so, take your time, maybe say something else completely irrelevant to my point again.
"i never said it does. you keep repeating that like a mantra."
What you said was:"their belief that the earth is 6000yrsold is only a PART of the reason why they reject evolution". I just point out that the two ideas are not the same. You can reject evoution, without beliving the earth is 6000yrsold. You keep saying it is a part of the reason they reject it. I just want it clear that someone can reject evolution without a young earth being a part of the reasoning.
once again, you do not let me down, with your obsession of your burning desire to talk about the 6000yrold earth. i've stopped talking about that 6000years ago, so i think you can forget about too now. but i don't expect you to, because you are cassette player set on a repeat mode.
but just in another pointless attempt to educate you, saying that it's a PART of the reason they reject it does NOT mean EVERYBODY reject it for that reason. notice neither did i ever say such thing or disagreed with you on that point? it's just irrelevant to what we are talking about.
i'm getting pretty weary of this. i'll give u one last chance to refute on my original argument. if your make another irrelevant commnent, i'll just take that as you avoiding(which just means u accept the fact)
1.ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE(their belief and interpretation of the Bible is the VERY thing that define them as Christians) you can't argue this because it's a stat from NEWSWEEK. it's simply a FACT.
thus,
2.they would not approve of your "christian views" (because they are radically different from the norms of the majority of christian faith, and the norms of beliefs are what DEFINES religion.)
I have been to hundreds of churches in the US. I have never heard the word evolution even mentioned. It hardly defines Christianity. Christianity is based on Christ, on what he said to do. On the New Testament. Most may doubt evolution because of the way they read Genesis, but the whole Old Testament is just a side-light to Christianity, not its focus.
of course they don't mention evolution in the church.. gosh, what are you a dumbass? really, let me know how old you are. you GOTTA be just either 1.really young and naive or 2.mentally challenged. let just hoping the former is the case for your sake...
no.. of course they wouldn't mention it in church. why would they? why don't you just go up to them and directly ask if they accept evolution. i guarantee almost all of them DON'T. and that's my exact point.
and you have a serious reasoning deficiency, or rather NO reasoning at all. so, in my another vain attempt to educate you, think about this. look, you are trying to refute my argument by telling me that churches DO in fact support evolution, right? but the evidence you offer(that churches don't mention/don't like to talk about evolution)doesn't work to put your argument in advantage. do you see why?
Your evidence was that most Christians in the US don't believe in evolution. I expect you would find that most will also say they like the idea of marriage, Christmas and ice cream and oppose counterfeiting and cruelty to animals. In no way does any of that make any of those things central to Christianity or define Christianity. Do you think Christianity is defined by Christians opposition to counterfeiting money? Just because most would oppose it doesn't make it define us. Same for evolution.
religion is about humans trying to come up with an explanation of their existence. evolution tackles RIGHT AT THE HEART of that question. it is about the origin of human species and it tells humans evolved from other species, and it directly contradicts the christian creationism which tells humans came from Adam and Eve with the ridiculous talking snake. whether you believe evolution or not has everything to do with you being christian.
whereas your ridiculous comparison of liking icecream/opposition to counterfeiting has NOTHING to do with being christian. if christian denies evolution, you will almost everytime find him denying for religious reasons. if a christian likes/don't like icecream, you'll ALWAYS find that reason has NOTHING to do with religious reasons.
do you get it?
and yer comparison to Christmas was actually antithetic to the point u were trying to make - b/c accepting christmas IS crucial to christianity
let me teach you about deductive reasoning. what conclusion do you expect me to draw from your evidence(the fact that churches don't mention evolution)? there are two possibilities i can deduce from this.
1.churches don't WANT to talk about it.
2.churches don't CARE.
now, think, use your brain your mommy has given you(not God), can EITHER one of those possibilities support your argument(that churches support evoultion)? just THINK. it's simple, THEY CANNOT
IF churches did support, then they would definitely MENTION evolution to incorporate into their teaching, right?
gees you know..if i went to rehab center to work with retarded kids, i would actually get PAID for this kind of stuff, ok? so you should thank me for this.
so there it is again my vain attempt to educate a mentally deficient child.
"it's what's called "cherrypicking" (if you don't understand what that means, just go look it up. i'm tired of explaining.)"
Is it really that hard to understand CHRISTIANITY is centered around CHRIST? While we love the OT, it is just the coming attractions for Jesus. That's hardly cherry-picking.
Is it really hard to understand any religion is centered around the commonly accepted belief by the majority of that religious group?(well it was a rhetorical question - of course it's hard because you are a moron)
and is it really hard to understand that commonality in accepted beliefs occurs only with, not all, but a limited interpretation of the Bible?
lets say i believed in christ, but i came up with the my own wild interpretation of the bible that completely ignores the norms and commonality of the beliefs of the christian community. would that make me and my beliefs WHICH came from my very own distinct interpretation considered "christian" by the christian community? (rhetorical question-i'd not say "yes." it'd be worse than saying you are a retard, which would actually, in your case, be a compliment.. so, i guess you could say yes. lol)
so that's what you are doing, but just to a lesser degree. u are cherrypicking information in the Bible to justify your disapproved views, which is fine, but just realize they aren't "christian views" there are verses in bible that if a wife cheats, you can beat her as you wish, now, if a self-claimed "christian" does that, does that make him christian? no
so here's the fact you don't want to accept: the christian view tells us evolution did not occur. deny it as much as you like, it's a fact
"verses in bible that if a wife cheats, you can beat her as you wish"
Are you another of the atheists that don't understand the difference between the "old covenant" that God had with Israel and the "new covennant" that God has with Christianity? If you don't understand that-you don't understand Christianity at all.
"the christian view tells us evolution did not occur"
So is anti-counterfeiting a "christian view" too? Neither view is integral to Christianity, even if most hold to them.
->There are a plenty of other versus in the Bible, in both new and old covenant, that make outrageous claims brutally violating basic human rigths(go look'em up yourself). if you don't understand that-you don't understand Christianity as all.
"So is anti-counterfeiting...hold to them."
-> your bird-sized brain apparently did register my point of why evolution is so much more critical to christian belief than counterfeiting. go back up and reread
"point of why evolution is so much more critical to christian belief"
You did not make such a point. You showed most Christians do not believe in evolution. You completely failed to show that as in any way critical to Christian belief. Christian belief may tell us evolution doesn't occur, and it may tell us not to cheat the authorities with counterfeiting, neither is a critical part of Christian belief. At best fairly minor collateral items. The critical parts of Christianity deal with Jesus
yeah i made the point. it's just your peabrain that didn't register. reread the my 2 comments from above, first of them with starts with "don't you see why that comparison is nonsense?" you probably won't get it this time either though... because i understand you are mentally challenged.
See your problem is that you really believe this: "Is it really hard to understand any religion is centered around the commonly accepted belief by the majority of that religious group". Which is obviously wrong as I have shown. There are hundreds of commonly accepted beliefs by a majority of Christians that are in no way "central" to the religion. Pick any minor detail in the NT and it is probably commonly accepted, but that doesn't make it a central tenet. It is a minor detail.
3 minor details that are a commonly accepted beliefs by the majority of Christians: 1. Joseph was a carpenter 2. Jesus has seen people fishing & 3. Guards at the cross gambled for some of Jesus clothes. None of those things, even by stretching them, could be considered central tenets of Christianity. They just aren't that important to Christianity, even if accepted and believed by the majority of Christians. You have completely failed to show any reason opposition to evolution is central to us.
"You have completely failed to show any reason opposition to evolution is central to us."
i explained it. do i have to quote and repeat every single thing i say? go back up and read.
READ!! USE YOUR BRAIN even tho it's a size of a pea!!
"religion is about... evolution tackles RIGHT AT THE HEART...it is about the origin of human species and it tells humans evolved from other species, and it directly contradicts the christian creationism which tells humans came from Adam and Eve"
It isn't at the heart. It isn't even important. Christianity is all about Jesus, his life, his sacrifice, and his message to us. Nothing about the origin of the species is central to Christianity. It is barely mentioned in the New Testament.
"Christianity is all about Jesus, his life, his sacrifice, and his message to us."
unfortunately that's just your view. that's why i'm keep telling your that's not how most christians look at things. to most christians, it's not just about his teachings, it's also about how humans came literally-and not just metaphorically-came from Adam and Eve with a talking snake.
your a very small minority of those unaccepted reformed christian. i don't value your opinion as a chirstian's opinion.
no..there's no problem with my statement, it's just you who misunderstood again because you have comprehension deficiency. when i say "the commonly accepted belief by the majority" i'm talking about a common SET of beliefs. it doesn't have to be just one. if person A,B,C each have 10 beliefs, each may have 2-3 beliefs that they don't share, but they other 6-7 beliefs that they COMMONLY share. and those woldd be beliefs so common among Christians, such as disbelief of evolution. savvy?
"i say "the commonly accepted belief by the majority" i'm talking about a common SET of beliefs."
And many beliefs that are commonly accepted among christians, e.g. Jesus' Dad being a carpenter, just aren't that important. If Joseph was a ditch-digger instead of a carpenter, would Christianity be any different? No. Evolution is one of those collateral issues, that Christans may have common views on, but which simply isn't a central tenet to the relion.
just happening to have common views on something is one issue, having common views on something for RELIGIOUS reasons is ANOTHER, and a COMPLETELY different issue.
when most christians oppose counterfeiting for secular reasons.
however, when most christians reject evolution, it's for religious reasons.
"just happening to have common views on something is one issue, having common views on something for RELIGIOUS reasons is ANOTHER, and a COMPLETELY different issue."
So the status of Jesus father's occupation is a central tenet of Christrianity in your view? Christians have commmon views on that issue, entirely for religious reasons. Yet it is isn't important enough to be a central tenet. Neither are views on evolution. Not everything we have common views on because of religion is important.
you, sir, are a complete moron to compare such an insignificant factual information to a theory that denies the central ideas of christian creationism. the bible clearly states all organisms on earth were created separately and at the instant. you keep denying this fact. whole first and second chapters of genesis directly contradicts evolution.
there's no doubt that evolution obviously bothers almost all christians enough that they feel the need to make creationism museum, intelligent design
So? Christianity is a religion about being unselfish. It isn't a religion about maximizing your own human rights. You go into Christianity expecting persecution. A basic right is your own property, yet Christians are told to share it with the needy. Not just their excess, but until it hurts. It is about going further than required (the "extra mile") even when by right you should be allowed to stop at 1. The "turn the other cheek" idea isn't consistent w/ my human rights.
the bible violates humans rights far beyond just a rights of property. just google "ridiculous bible verses" you'll get plenty of results. there are contradicting verses within the bible everywhere.
I didn't limit my comments to property rights. Jesus requires Christians to give up lots of things that would otherwise be our rights. The "turn the other cheek" requirements go far beyond that. We are told to forgive many intrusions and violences that you would consider a violation of your human rights.
no, you idiot.. is it so hard to interpret my examples in the context of the argument i'm trying to make? focus kid! my argument is that christians cherrypick verses from the bible. get it? when i say violation of human rights i'm talking about severe ones such as beating your wives or stoning adulterers to death. is that what jesus requires you to do? you'd of course say no. and it's called cherrypicking.
If you don't understand the difference between the Old Covenant that God had with Israel, and the New Covenant he has with Christians, you have a very superficial understanding of Christianity.
if you don't understand that pastors use a plenty of verses from the Old Covenant in their preachings, if you don't understand that taking just favorable verses out that help you and leaving unfavorable verses out that you don't *like* is called CHERRYPICKING, you have a very superficial understanding of Christianity.
just before you bring up another irrelevant topic and drag this on forever,
let's just wrap up this discussion.
my point: the bible and evolution theory are apparently too contradictory. whether you accept the bible, or accept evolution, not both or taking partial beliefs, cherrypicking from each(well you can do that, but then that'd be just coming up with your own religion)
you could not provide any valid refutation to this statement.
your irrelevant response to my point: "Jesus and his teachings are what's important!" and you seem to be saying.. "whether evolution even happend or not isn't important to us christians anyways(which is obviously false)"
but your response is irrelevant to the fact "bible DOES contradict evolution" thus you really did nothing to provide any proper refutation. and my point perfectly stands.
conclusion:
"the bible and evolution theory are not compatible."
and just to add one more thing. what follows after the fact that bible and evolution is incompatible is that you, who incorporate this apparently incompatible theory to your "christian belief", obviously do NOT have a "christian belief." you are only a self-claimed "christian" whose beliefs have been molded and reformed to fit your own personal belief. they aren't christians'.
God planning evolution is a nonsense. so just don't ever say stupid shit like that again, then i'll no problem.
If God plans nutrinos and gravity and black holes and molecules and isotopes and the strong force and the weak force and anti-matter and DNA and erosion and volcanic vents and fluid dynamics and energy and mass and the speed of light .... why do you single out evolution as something ridiculous for God to plan? If God plans for water to erode limestone into caverns, why can't he plan for animals to change over time?
"If God plans nutrinos and gravity and...why do you single out evolution as something ridiculous for God to plan?"
-> all these claims simply under the presupposition of the existence of your god don't mean anything when you can't even prove the existence of your god in the first place. it's called circular reasoning, only that morons as yourself have. besides, like i have said 1000times and proved, your god's bible&evolution=incompatible. so it's a nonsense your god planning evolution
Stating a general disbelief in God is one thing. You are saying God using evolution is nonsense, distinguishing it in some way from all the other claims about God making the universe, etc. Why is God using evolution more "nonsense" than all the other claims about God? You seem to be singling that one out, as if it is different than all the others. If you want to state a disbelief in God generally fine. But why is God using evolution is any different than other spectacular claims about him?
you are just phenomenal.after all that explanation..r u really asking me that? this WHOLE comment page was devoted to this one statement: "the bible and evolution theory are incompatible." what does that mean to you? christians claim the bible=words of god and the source of their belief. if what your god(christian god) claimed directly contradicts evolution, then it MEANS evolution and your god does not work! get the connection? evolution ESPECIALLY does NOT work for YOUR god for this reason.
"this WHOLE comment page was devoted to this one statement: "the bible and evolution theory are incompatible."
But they aren't. The Bible doesn't say anything about evolution, pro or con, nor does it imply that animal types don't change over time through natural selection. Your statement is just an unsupported one. The closest you have come to defending it is your "you can't even prove the existence of your God in the first place" which is just another reiteration of your disbelief in God.
my supporting evidence is written all up there. if you didn't read or understand my supporting evidence, that's your fault.
of course bible doesn't say anythign about evolution, duh.. how would those bronze age people have any idea about such a delicate and complicated theory supported by advanced science? they made shit up and unfortunately some of them turned out to contradict evolution. the whole book of genesis contradicts evolution. i'm sure you know why, i don't need to tell you anymore
genesis clearly says "men" and "animals" were created. if you want to say bible supports evolution, it should've said, first "atoms" or "cells" were created or something of that sort, something that shows life evolved out of simplicity to complexity, but of course these are bronzeage people, they are clueless about scientific facts. and what about adam and eve? their story directly contradicts evolution.
seriously, just stop. you know what you are arguing for isn't working.
"Mud" is predominantly mineral and not organic matter.
As for evolution being compatible with the bible:
Genesis claims we are all descendants of Adam and Eve. Further, the Great Flood story claims all land bound animals were reduced to a single male and female specimen and humans to but a handful. This is fundamentally incompatible with evolution because such decimation would have required excessive inbreeding to recover from and thus been fatal to all species involved.
"Mud" is predominantly mineral and not organic matter.
Not in a swamp. It is mostly organic there. Decomposing organic materials like we find in most swamps is properly dewcribed as mud.
"Genesis claims we are all descendants of Adam and Eve"
What is your point? So does evolutionary theory. Science claims we are all descended from a single female human they call Mitochondrial Eve. Every human being alive today is her descendant. Just wiki "Mitochondrial Eve" if you don't believe me.
"Not in a swamp. It is mostly organic there. Decomposing organic materials like we find in most swamps is properly described as mud."
Very true, but we're talking mud in the context of genesis. That is, shortly after life was created and thus before anything was decomposing on that scale.
Unless, of course, god also made decomposing organic material while he was at it. That would be awfully convenient indeed, underlining the unfalsifiable nature of such... "theories".
"Very true, but we're talking mud in the context of genesis. That is, shortly after life was created and thus before anything was decomposing on that scale."
I disagree. The context of Genesis makes clear those days aren't 24 hour days but time periods. The sun and moon aren't created on the first day, how could they
be 24 hour days if they weren't? They look like eras to me, plenty of time for decomposition. And fits very well with what we know of biology.
"Science claims we are all descended from a single female human they call Mitochondrial Eve."
I'm well aware of the Mitochondrial Eve hypothesis. But it's just that; a hypothesis. And not one I happen to support.
But even if I did, it doesn't say she (and her mate) were the only specimen alive at the time. There was still a relatively large diversity and we happen to all share her lineage because sooner or later all bloodlines crossed with hers (or perished). Again, assuming it's correct.
Still, you were making fun of the idea that we all could be descended from one woman, and some of the most respected scientists in the world say the same thing.
Although I don't agree with that. It's a reasonable explanation. You'll like the last episode of this series. It's called "What about God?". And it's pretty much about Christians that include evolution in their faith.
please don't let these dickheads insult and have one of the most greatest scientific work of humanity blurred by their religious beliefs. leave the science to scientists before they start mimicking to come up with another pseudo science bullshit like intelligent design. i'm just sick of it. just look how many comments it took me to say that evolution theory and christian creationism simply aren't compatible. that moron still denies it.
if you think GOD GOD GOD GOD created eveything WHY THE FUCK BOTHER LOOKING FOR, STUDYING, SEARCHING for any explanations in the first place? just stick with your damn bible and pray so you can get to heaven
"WHY THE FUCK BOTHER LOOKING FOR, STUDYING, SEARCHING for any explanations in the first place? just stick with your damn bible"
If God created everything, then the more we learn about what is around us, the more we understand God's handiwork. That's what motivates many of the great scientists of history, like Isaac Newton, Lord Kelvin, etc.
really, learning about the nature(if you do it properly) and believing in God(and i'm talking about Christian god here) is a very contradictory thing because the more you learn about it, the more you have to accept the evolution theory(or a better version of it) and the more you get to accept the evolution theory, the more you'll have to reject the bible. and please don't even try to argue that the bible can be somehow interpreted to embrace evolution. that's just cherrypicking information.
"...accept the evolution theory, the more you'll have to reject the bible"
No. That isn't true at all. The more I learn about science, the deeper my faith becomes. For one thing, look at the voluminous evidence that animals change over time through natural selection. Then compare what we have to show how abiogenesis could occur here to give us life. Zip. No reasonable or plausible anything. Scientists like Crick are resorting to the "hail Mary pass" of "maybe spores from space" did it.
you apparently do not know how to argue. so let me break it down for you. all you need to do is provide refutation to one of the below propositions. if you can't it just means you are accepting everything i say.
1. the Bible's explanation for the origin of universe directly contradicts the idea of life evolving at all.
2. it only follows that accepting the evolution theory = rejecting the bible.
3. so, it is IMPOSSIBLE to accept evolution theory and the bible at the same time.
"1. the Bible's explanation for the origin of universe directly contradicts the idea of life evolving at all."
What does the origin of the universe (the Big Bang) have to do with life on Earth? Genesis fits very well with the Big Bang. Einstein admitted he had trouble accepting it at first because it was so consistent with christian dogma.
"2. ... accepting the evolution theory = rejecting the bible"
when you don't understand my proposition, you ask for my clarification, not provide irrelevant responses or divert the topic. it's quite annoying for me to have to tell you to stay on the topic of discussion(it's like babysitting). your response to (1)is completely irrelevant obviously because you have a severe comprehension issue with what i meant in the first place. We're not talking about the Big Bang here. We're talking about EVOLUTION. okay? for your god's sake, stay focused with the topic.
see, i knew you were illiterate. please READ WHAT I SAY. "BIBLE'S EXPLANATION for the origin of universe."
repeat with me. BIBLE'S EXPLANATION, BIBLE'S EXPLANATION, BIBLE'S EXPLANATION, BIBLE'S EXPLANATION - which specifically states the universe was created 6000years ago and all life was created at the instant, not evolved.
really..getting a simple message across to another human being should not be such an excruciating process. please read EVERYTHING i say from now on before you respond
"1.the Bible's explanation for the origin of universe[which says God created the Universe and all the life. in other words, each organism were created at the instant to the way they look now, NOT evolved over millions of years from electrons or sing cell] directly contradicts the idea of life evolving at all."
if you now understand, tell me whether you agree or not. then provide explanation.
if you STILL DON'T understand, ask me to clarify again.
The problem is that the Bible doesn't say: "each organism were created at the instant to the way they look now". I certainly don't think they were. Humans don't look like they did even decades ago. Check out the football all-district teams for 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000. If you look each decade the linemen will be about 1/2 inch to an inch taller and 5 to 10 lbs heavier than the previous decade. For a longer scale, check out a coat of armor from the 1600s. The guys who wore them were tiny.
so, to rephrase what you say, you DON'T agree to my proposition(1) because you believe the Bible and the Evolution Theory complement each other.
see, listen Ms.Illiterate, if you actually READ my second comment on this page, notice i said, "please don't even try to argue that the bible can be somehow interpreted to embrace evolution." Now, i clearly see that you ARE trying to argue that very thing. See, if you gave me this kind of reponse to state your position on that part earlier,
our discussion wouldn't have BEEN SO LONG. thanks to your superb comprehension skills, i had SO MUCH fun wasting time with you.
your last reponse was ALL i needed. i'm not going to try to convince you and again go through the excruciating and time-consuming process to make you understand a SIMPLE FACT that the BIBLE CANNOT complement the Evolution Theory. The Bible says the Earth is 6000yrs old. Evidences from Evo Theory DO NOT. try to argue a fact, i must believe you are just simply retarded
IT DOES NOT !!! There are no dates in the Bible. Are you a Young Earth Creationist or get your information about the Bible from YECs? Quote a chapter and verse for your 6,000 years date. And don't go adding up geneologies, that has nothing to do with the age of the Earth, it just links you to Adam leaving the garden. Plus it has always been common practice to skip unimportant members in the chain of geneologies, as they were passed down by memorization.
puhahaha get lost you are ridiculous. stop wastin my time i won't try to convince you that the Bible doesn't complement the Evolution Theory. all Christians that have ever existed since the beginning of Christianity until recently believed the Earth is 6,000yrs old. geneologies might not prove EVERYTHING, but NOTHING in the Bible suggests the Earth is billions of years old or life evolved. believe in your own little customized christianity all you want, no other christians will care about them
"all Christians that have ever existed since the beginning of Christianity until recently believed the Earth is 6,000yrs old"
Wrong again. The 6,000 year date was first proposed by Bishop Ussher in the 1600s. Christianity had been around a millenia and a half before the idea ever came up.
So you said the Bible says the age of the earth is 6,000 years old. Do you admit it doesn't? Because that idea is just a 400 years past Bishop's musings, not something biblical.
cut out your bullshit and trivial nitpicking on details.. you know it's true that most of christians believe the Earth is 6000yrs old. even if they didn't, almost all of them are against the Evolution Theory. they, the majority, don't even approve your point of view, and you as a christian. so in fact, you aren't even a christian and aren't entitled to in anyway whatsoever to present your views as legitimate christian views. you can't customize religion, it just doesn't work that way
1:35 " goddamnit, im noooot goood enoughh :( "
CORNP00 2 months ago
1:46 loooool
"JUST BECAUSE I'M DRESSED THIS WAY, IT DOES NOT MAKE ME A WHORE!"
ShahnamPersia 4 months ago
7:57
this guy aint no Brad Pitt, but he is a Good and Loving father.
That child is lucky to have such a father who would give his life for his child.
PurePower025 5 months ago
1:35 blue balls!!
yits051 10 months ago
i like 1:23-1:31 that bird is fucking hilarious!!!! i watched it today in biology
kittytemari1 1 year ago
I heart creationists. They say such silly things with the greatest conviction.
swiminthesoil 2 years ago
thanks for posting this. i needed it for a class assignment and wasn't able to check it out of the library! :D
YrSoObvious 3 years ago 3
lol always happy to help
urantivirus 3 years ago
@YrSoObvious ditto! thanks sooo much!
MrsNickJonas13746 11 months ago
cut out your bullshit and trivial nitpicking on details.. you know it's true that most of christians believe the Earth is 6000yrs old. even if they didn't, almost all of them are against the Evolution Theory. they, the majority, don't even approve your point of view, and you as a christian. so in fact, you aren't even a christian and aren't entitled to in anyway whatsoever to present your views as legitimate christian views. you can't customize religion, it just doesn't work that way
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
It isn't trivial that you say the Bible says something (age of the earth) when it doesn't. Few Christians I know think the earth is 6,000 years old. I don't know what a scientific survey would say, but there is wide variety in Christian beliefs on non-biblical topics like this one. From what I have seen strict Young Earth Creationists are a minority, though a large one. You also had the idea that the 6,000 date was from the beginning of Christianity, when it is actually on 400 or so years old.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
here goes with your bullshit again...
a surevey from Newsweek showed that 91%of Americans believed there is God and 87% believed Evolution is not true. What does this tell you blockhead? ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE.
them believing the Earth is 6000yrs old is just ONE reason. there are plenty more verses that contradict the evolution theory.
but most importantly, bible doesn't mention evolution
What more bullshit will you come up with next?
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
Many people who do not believe in evolution do not think the earth is 6000 years old. The 2 are completely seperate issues. If asked that way, I would express doubts about some aspects of evolutionary theory, yet I believe the earth much older than 6,000 years.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
are you an idiot? i just SAID their belief that the earth is 6000yrsold is only a PART of the reason why they reject evolution. there r more comprehensive set of reasons along w/ that why christians reject evolution. it doesn't MATTER if YOU believe against the majority of christian beliefs.
the point here is that ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE. how many more times do u want me to restate that or are u merely too stupid to understand a simple proposition?
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"are you an idiot? i just SAID their belief that the earth is 6000yrsold is only a PART of the reason why they reject evolution"
I am saying that many reject evolution who do not believe in a 6000 yrs old Earth. You have the two linked when it is for some people and isn't for others. Even someone who thinks the earth is quite old can point to problems in the Cambrian explosion time period.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
whoosh~!! there you again my point flyng right over your head. i think talking to a deaf person may be actually easier. what does it mean to you when i CAPITALIZE certain words?
let me repeat so i may hear it flying right over your head again.
ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE.
did you understand that? or are capitalized words not displayed on your computer monitor?
if the former is the case, just refute on that point, otherwise i'm outta here.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
let me repeat what I said so I may hear it flying right over your head again.
JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU BELIEVE IN A 6,000 YEAR OLD EARTH.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU BELIEVE IN A 6,000 YEAR OLD EARTH."
i never said it does. you keep repeating that like a mantra.
for the thousandth time, i repeat, my point is ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE.
but i will not expect you to get it this time either, because you are apparently retarded. so, take your time, maybe say something else completely irrelevant to my point again.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"i never said it does. you keep repeating that like a mantra."
What you said was:"their belief that the earth is 6000yrsold is only a PART of the reason why they reject evolution". I just point out that the two ideas are not the same. You can reject evoution, without beliving the earth is 6000yrsold. You keep saying it is a part of the reason they reject it. I just want it clear that someone can reject evolution without a young earth being a part of the reasoning.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
once again, you do not let me down, with your obsession of your burning desire to talk about the 6000yrold earth. i've stopped talking about that 6000years ago, so i think you can forget about too now. but i don't expect you to, because you are cassette player set on a repeat mode.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
but just in another pointless attempt to educate you, saying that it's a PART of the reason they reject it does NOT mean EVERYBODY reject it for that reason. notice neither did i ever say such thing or disagreed with you on that point? it's just irrelevant to what we are talking about.
i'm getting pretty weary of this. i'll give u one last chance to refute on my original argument. if your make another irrelevant commnent, i'll just take that as you avoiding(which just means u accept the fact)
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
1.ALMOST ALL CHRISTIANS DON'T BELIEVE EVOLUTION CAN COMPLEMENT THE BIBLE(their belief and interpretation of the Bible is the VERY thing that define them as Christians) you can't argue this because it's a stat from NEWSWEEK. it's simply a FACT.
thus,
2.they would not approve of your "christian views" (because they are radically different from the norms of the majority of christian faith, and the norms of beliefs are what DEFINES religion.)
it's only your personal belief, not christian
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
I have been to hundreds of churches in the US. I have never heard the word evolution even mentioned. It hardly defines Christianity. Christianity is based on Christ, on what he said to do. On the New Testament. Most may doubt evolution because of the way they read Genesis, but the whole Old Testament is just a side-light to Christianity, not its focus.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
of course they don't mention evolution in the church.. gosh, what are you a dumbass? really, let me know how old you are. you GOTTA be just either 1.really young and naive or 2.mentally challenged. let just hoping the former is the case for your sake...
no.. of course they wouldn't mention it in church. why would they? why don't you just go up to them and directly ask if they accept evolution. i guarantee almost all of them DON'T. and that's my exact point.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
and you have a serious reasoning deficiency, or rather NO reasoning at all. so, in my another vain attempt to educate you, think about this. look, you are trying to refute my argument by telling me that churches DO in fact support evolution, right? but the evidence you offer(that churches don't mention/don't like to talk about evolution)doesn't work to put your argument in advantage. do you see why?
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
Your evidence was that most Christians in the US don't believe in evolution. I expect you would find that most will also say they like the idea of marriage, Christmas and ice cream and oppose counterfeiting and cruelty to animals. In no way does any of that make any of those things central to Christianity or define Christianity. Do you think Christianity is defined by Christians opposition to counterfeiting money? Just because most would oppose it doesn't make it define us. Same for evolution.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
don't you see why that comparison is nonsense?
religion is about humans trying to come up with an explanation of their existence. evolution tackles RIGHT AT THE HEART of that question. it is about the origin of human species and it tells humans evolved from other species, and it directly contradicts the christian creationism which tells humans came from Adam and Eve with the ridiculous talking snake. whether you believe evolution or not has everything to do with you being christian.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
whereas your ridiculous comparison of liking icecream/opposition to counterfeiting has NOTHING to do with being christian. if christian denies evolution, you will almost everytime find him denying for religious reasons. if a christian likes/don't like icecream, you'll ALWAYS find that reason has NOTHING to do with religious reasons.
do you get it?
and yer comparison to Christmas was actually antithetic to the point u were trying to make - b/c accepting christmas IS crucial to christianity
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
let me teach you about deductive reasoning. what conclusion do you expect me to draw from your evidence(the fact that churches don't mention evolution)? there are two possibilities i can deduce from this.
1.churches don't WANT to talk about it.
2.churches don't CARE.
now, think, use your brain your mommy has given you(not God), can EITHER one of those possibilities support your argument(that churches support evoultion)? just THINK. it's simple, THEY CANNOT
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
IF churches did support, then they would definitely MENTION evolution to incorporate into their teaching, right?
gees you know..if i went to rehab center to work with retarded kids, i would actually get PAID for this kind of stuff, ok? so you should thank me for this.
so there it is again my vain attempt to educate a mentally deficient child.
now, let me move on to the next point.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"you may doubt evolution because of the way they read Genesis, but the whole Old Testament is just a side-light to Christianity"
it's what's called "cherrypicking" (if you don't understand what that means, just go look it up. i'm tired of explaining.)
first, you say "the way they read Genesis" is wrong. what gives you right to judge what interpretation is right/wrong? nothing
second, disproving of old-testament's value. you are cherrypicking information to support your disapproved views
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"it's what's called "cherrypicking" (if you don't understand what that means, just go look it up. i'm tired of explaining.)"
Is it really that hard to understand CHRISTIANITY is centered around CHRIST? While we love the OT, it is just the coming attractions for Jesus. That's hardly cherry-picking.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
Is it really hard to understand any religion is centered around the commonly accepted belief by the majority of that religious group?(well it was a rhetorical question - of course it's hard because you are a moron)
and is it really hard to understand that commonality in accepted beliefs occurs only with, not all, but a limited interpretation of the Bible?
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
lets say i believed in christ, but i came up with the my own wild interpretation of the bible that completely ignores the norms and commonality of the beliefs of the christian community. would that make me and my beliefs WHICH came from my very own distinct interpretation considered "christian" by the christian community? (rhetorical question-i'd not say "yes." it'd be worse than saying you are a retard, which would actually, in your case, be a compliment.. so, i guess you could say yes. lol)
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
so that's what you are doing, but just to a lesser degree. u are cherrypicking information in the Bible to justify your disapproved views, which is fine, but just realize they aren't "christian views" there are verses in bible that if a wife cheats, you can beat her as you wish, now, if a self-claimed "christian" does that, does that make him christian? no
so here's the fact you don't want to accept: the christian view tells us evolution did not occur. deny it as much as you like, it's a fact
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"verses in bible that if a wife cheats, you can beat her as you wish"
Are you another of the atheists that don't understand the difference between the "old covenant" that God had with Israel and the "new covennant" that God has with Christianity? If you don't understand that-you don't understand Christianity at all.
"the christian view tells us evolution did not occur"
So is anti-counterfeiting a "christian view" too? Neither view is integral to Christianity, even if most hold to them.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"Are you another of...with Christianity?"
->There are a plenty of other versus in the Bible, in both new and old covenant, that make outrageous claims brutally violating basic human rigths(go look'em up yourself). if you don't understand that-you don't understand Christianity as all.
"So is anti-counterfeiting...hold to them."
-> your bird-sized brain apparently did register my point of why evolution is so much more critical to christian belief than counterfeiting. go back up and reread
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"point of why evolution is so much more critical to christian belief"
You did not make such a point. You showed most Christians do not believe in evolution. You completely failed to show that as in any way critical to Christian belief. Christian belief may tell us evolution doesn't occur, and it may tell us not to cheat the authorities with counterfeiting, neither is a critical part of Christian belief. At best fairly minor collateral items. The critical parts of Christianity deal with Jesus
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
yeah i made the point. it's just your peabrain that didn't register. reread the my 2 comments from above, first of them with starts with "don't you see why that comparison is nonsense?" you probably won't get it this time either though... because i understand you are mentally challenged.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
See your problem is that you really believe this: "Is it really hard to understand any religion is centered around the commonly accepted belief by the majority of that religious group". Which is obviously wrong as I have shown. There are hundreds of commonly accepted beliefs by a majority of Christians that are in no way "central" to the religion. Pick any minor detail in the NT and it is probably commonly accepted, but that doesn't make it a central tenet. It is a minor detail.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
3 minor details that are a commonly accepted beliefs by the majority of Christians: 1. Joseph was a carpenter 2. Jesus has seen people fishing & 3. Guards at the cross gambled for some of Jesus clothes. None of those things, even by stretching them, could be considered central tenets of Christianity. They just aren't that important to Christianity, even if accepted and believed by the majority of Christians. You have completely failed to show any reason opposition to evolution is central to us.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"You have completely failed to show any reason opposition to evolution is central to us."
i explained it. do i have to quote and repeat every single thing i say? go back up and read.
READ!! USE YOUR BRAIN even tho it's a size of a pea!!
"religion is about... evolution tackles RIGHT AT THE HEART...it is about the origin of human species and it tells humans evolved from other species, and it directly contradicts the christian creationism which tells humans came from Adam and Eve"
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
evolution tackles RIGHT AT THE HEART..."
It isn't at the heart. It isn't even important. Christianity is all about Jesus, his life, his sacrifice, and his message to us. Nothing about the origin of the species is central to Christianity. It is barely mentioned in the New Testament.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"Christianity is all about Jesus, his life, his sacrifice, and his message to us."
unfortunately that's just your view. that's why i'm keep telling your that's not how most christians look at things. to most christians, it's not just about his teachings, it's also about how humans came literally-and not just metaphorically-came from Adam and Eve with a talking snake.
your a very small minority of those unaccepted reformed christian. i don't value your opinion as a chirstian's opinion.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
no..there's no problem with my statement, it's just you who misunderstood again because you have comprehension deficiency. when i say "the commonly accepted belief by the majority" i'm talking about a common SET of beliefs. it doesn't have to be just one. if person A,B,C each have 10 beliefs, each may have 2-3 beliefs that they don't share, but they other 6-7 beliefs that they COMMONLY share. and those woldd be beliefs so common among Christians, such as disbelief of evolution. savvy?
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"i say "the commonly accepted belief by the majority" i'm talking about a common SET of beliefs."
And many beliefs that are commonly accepted among christians, e.g. Jesus' Dad being a carpenter, just aren't that important. If Joseph was a ditch-digger instead of a carpenter, would Christianity be any different? No. Evolution is one of those collateral issues, that Christans may have common views on, but which simply isn't a central tenet to the relion.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
i've already explained this 5000 times.
just happening to have common views on something is one issue, having common views on something for RELIGIOUS reasons is ANOTHER, and a COMPLETELY different issue.
when most christians oppose counterfeiting for secular reasons.
however, when most christians reject evolution, it's for religious reasons.
you still don't get it do you peabrain...
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"just happening to have common views on something is one issue, having common views on something for RELIGIOUS reasons is ANOTHER, and a COMPLETELY different issue."
So the status of Jesus father's occupation is a central tenet of Christrianity in your view? Christians have commmon views on that issue, entirely for religious reasons. Yet it is isn't important enough to be a central tenet. Neither are views on evolution. Not everything we have common views on because of religion is important.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
you, sir, are a complete moron to compare such an insignificant factual information to a theory that denies the central ideas of christian creationism. the bible clearly states all organisms on earth were created separately and at the instant. you keep denying this fact. whole first and second chapters of genesis directly contradicts evolution.
there's no doubt that evolution obviously bothers almost all christians enough that they feel the need to make creationism museum, intelligent design
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"basic human rights"
So? Christianity is a religion about being unselfish. It isn't a religion about maximizing your own human rights. You go into Christianity expecting persecution. A basic right is your own property, yet Christians are told to share it with the needy. Not just their excess, but until it hurts. It is about going further than required (the "extra mile") even when by right you should be allowed to stop at 1. The "turn the other cheek" idea isn't consistent w/ my human rights.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
the bible violates humans rights far beyond just a rights of property. just google "ridiculous bible verses" you'll get plenty of results. there are contradicting verses within the bible everywhere.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
I didn't limit my comments to property rights. Jesus requires Christians to give up lots of things that would otherwise be our rights. The "turn the other cheek" requirements go far beyond that. We are told to forgive many intrusions and violences that you would consider a violation of your human rights.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
no, you idiot.. is it so hard to interpret my examples in the context of the argument i'm trying to make? focus kid! my argument is that christians cherrypick verses from the bible. get it? when i say violation of human rights i'm talking about severe ones such as beating your wives or stoning adulterers to death. is that what jesus requires you to do? you'd of course say no. and it's called cherrypicking.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"or stoning adulterers to death"
If you don't understand the difference between the Old Covenant that God had with Israel, and the New Covenant he has with Christians, you have a very superficial understanding of Christianity.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
here's comes you cherrypicking again.
if you don't understand that pastors use a plenty of verses from the Old Covenant in their preachings, if you don't understand that taking just favorable verses out that help you and leaving unfavorable verses out that you don't *like* is called CHERRYPICKING, you have a very superficial understanding of Christianity.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
just before you bring up another irrelevant topic and drag this on forever,
let's just wrap up this discussion.
my point: the bible and evolution theory are apparently too contradictory. whether you accept the bible, or accept evolution, not both or taking partial beliefs, cherrypicking from each(well you can do that, but then that'd be just coming up with your own religion)
you could not provide any valid refutation to this statement.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
your irrelevant response to my point: "Jesus and his teachings are what's important!" and you seem to be saying.. "whether evolution even happend or not isn't important to us christians anyways(which is obviously false)"
but your response is irrelevant to the fact "bible DOES contradict evolution" thus you really did nothing to provide any proper refutation. and my point perfectly stands.
conclusion:
"the bible and evolution theory are not compatible."
end of discussion!
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
and just to add one more thing. what follows after the fact that bible and evolution is incompatible is that you, who incorporate this apparently incompatible theory to your "christian belief", obviously do NOT have a "christian belief." you are only a self-claimed "christian" whose beliefs have been molded and reformed to fit your own personal belief. they aren't christians'.
God planning evolution is a nonsense. so just don't ever say stupid shit like that again, then i'll no problem.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"God planning evolution is a nonsense"
Why?
If God plans nutrinos and gravity and black holes and molecules and isotopes and the strong force and the weak force and anti-matter and DNA and erosion and volcanic vents and fluid dynamics and energy and mass and the speed of light .... why do you single out evolution as something ridiculous for God to plan? If God plans for water to erode limestone into caverns, why can't he plan for animals to change over time?
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"If God plans nutrinos and gravity and...why do you single out evolution as something ridiculous for God to plan?"
-> all these claims simply under the presupposition of the existence of your god don't mean anything when you can't even prove the existence of your god in the first place. it's called circular reasoning, only that morons as yourself have. besides, like i have said 1000times and proved, your god's bible&evolution=incompatible. so it's a nonsense your god planning evolution
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
Stating a general disbelief in God is one thing. You are saying God using evolution is nonsense, distinguishing it in some way from all the other claims about God making the universe, etc. Why is God using evolution more "nonsense" than all the other claims about God? You seem to be singling that one out, as if it is different than all the others. If you want to state a disbelief in God generally fine. But why is God using evolution is any different than other spectacular claims about him?
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
you are just phenomenal.after all that explanation..r u really asking me that? this WHOLE comment page was devoted to this one statement: "the bible and evolution theory are incompatible." what does that mean to you? christians claim the bible=words of god and the source of their belief. if what your god(christian god) claimed directly contradicts evolution, then it MEANS evolution and your god does not work! get the connection? evolution ESPECIALLY does NOT work for YOUR god for this reason.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"this WHOLE comment page was devoted to this one statement: "the bible and evolution theory are incompatible."
But they aren't. The Bible doesn't say anything about evolution, pro or con, nor does it imply that animal types don't change over time through natural selection. Your statement is just an unsupported one. The closest you have come to defending it is your "you can't even prove the existence of your God in the first place" which is just another reiteration of your disbelief in God.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
my supporting evidence is written all up there. if you didn't read or understand my supporting evidence, that's your fault.
of course bible doesn't say anythign about evolution, duh.. how would those bronze age people have any idea about such a delicate and complicated theory supported by advanced science? they made shit up and unfortunately some of them turned out to contradict evolution. the whole book of genesis contradicts evolution. i'm sure you know why, i don't need to tell you anymore
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
genesis clearly says "men" and "animals" were created. if you want to say bible supports evolution, it should've said, first "atoms" or "cells" were created or something of that sort, something that shows life evolved out of simplicity to complexity, but of course these are bronzeage people, they are clueless about scientific facts. and what about adam and eve? their story directly contradicts evolution.
seriously, just stop. you know what you are arguing for isn't working.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
It talks of God making man from organic matter, i.e. mud. that's a pretty good description for a bronze age man.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
lol.. well you've improved: at least you've gained some sense of humor.
YES, that is quite a magnificent piece of evidence to show that!
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
@ShaundalynChic:
"Mud" is predominantly mineral and not organic matter.
As for evolution being compatible with the bible:
Genesis claims we are all descendants of Adam and Eve. Further, the Great Flood story claims all land bound animals were reduced to a single male and female specimen and humans to but a handful. This is fundamentally incompatible with evolution because such decimation would have required excessive inbreeding to recover from and thus been fatal to all species involved.
SergeantSplat 3 years ago 6
"Mud" is predominantly mineral and not organic matter.
Not in a swamp. It is mostly organic there. Decomposing organic materials like we find in most swamps is properly dewcribed as mud.
"Genesis claims we are all descendants of Adam and Eve"
What is your point? So does evolutionary theory. Science claims we are all descended from a single female human they call Mitochondrial Eve. Every human being alive today is her descendant. Just wiki "Mitochondrial Eve" if you don't believe me.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"Not in a swamp. It is mostly organic there. Decomposing organic materials like we find in most swamps is properly described as mud."
Very true, but we're talking mud in the context of genesis. That is, shortly after life was created and thus before anything was decomposing on that scale.
Unless, of course, god also made decomposing organic material while he was at it. That would be awfully convenient indeed, underlining the unfalsifiable nature of such... "theories".
SergeantSplat 3 years ago
"Very true, but we're talking mud in the context of genesis. That is, shortly after life was created and thus before anything was decomposing on that scale."
I disagree. The context of Genesis makes clear those days aren't 24 hour days but time periods. The sun and moon aren't created on the first day, how could they
be 24 hour days if they weren't? They look like eras to me, plenty of time for decomposition. And fits very well with what we know of biology.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
"Science claims we are all descended from a single female human they call Mitochondrial Eve."
I'm well aware of the Mitochondrial Eve hypothesis. But it's just that; a hypothesis. And not one I happen to support.
But even if I did, it doesn't say she (and her mate) were the only specimen alive at the time. There was still a relatively large diversity and we happen to all share her lineage because sooner or later all bloodlines crossed with hers (or perished). Again, assuming it's correct.
SergeantSplat 3 years ago
Still, you were making fun of the idea that we all could be descended from one woman, and some of the most respected scientists in the world say the same thing.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
All looks planned doesn't it?
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago 13
It almost does. But the more you learn about it. The more it all starts to make sense. All related forms of science, agree with evolution.
urantivirus 3 years ago 3
Not almost. It does. I don't dispute natural selection, just believe that was the way God wanted it.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
Although I don't agree with that. It's a reasonable explanation. You'll like the last episode of this series. It's called "What about God?". And it's pretty much about Christians that include evolution in their faith.
urantivirus 3 years ago
please don't let these dickheads insult and have one of the most greatest scientific work of humanity blurred by their religious beliefs. leave the science to scientists before they start mimicking to come up with another pseudo science bullshit like intelligent design. i'm just sick of it. just look how many comments it took me to say that evolution theory and christian creationism simply aren't compatible. that moron still denies it.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
if you think GOD GOD GOD GOD created eveything WHY THE FUCK BOTHER LOOKING FOR, STUDYING, SEARCHING for any explanations in the first place? just stick with your damn bible and pray so you can get to heaven
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"WHY THE FUCK BOTHER LOOKING FOR, STUDYING, SEARCHING for any explanations in the first place? just stick with your damn bible"
If God created everything, then the more we learn about what is around us, the more we understand God's handiwork. That's what motivates many of the great scientists of history, like Isaac Newton, Lord Kelvin, etc.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
really, learning about the nature(if you do it properly) and believing in God(and i'm talking about Christian god here) is a very contradictory thing because the more you learn about it, the more you have to accept the evolution theory(or a better version of it) and the more you get to accept the evolution theory, the more you'll have to reject the bible. and please don't even try to argue that the bible can be somehow interpreted to embrace evolution. that's just cherrypicking information.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"...accept the evolution theory, the more you'll have to reject the bible"
No. That isn't true at all. The more I learn about science, the deeper my faith becomes. For one thing, look at the voluminous evidence that animals change over time through natural selection. Then compare what we have to show how abiogenesis could occur here to give us life. Zip. No reasonable or plausible anything. Scientists like Crick are resorting to the "hail Mary pass" of "maybe spores from space" did it.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
you apparently do not know how to argue. so let me break it down for you. all you need to do is provide refutation to one of the below propositions. if you can't it just means you are accepting everything i say.
1. the Bible's explanation for the origin of universe directly contradicts the idea of life evolving at all.
2. it only follows that accepting the evolution theory = rejecting the bible.
3. so, it is IMPOSSIBLE to accept evolution theory and the bible at the same time.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"1. the Bible's explanation for the origin of universe directly contradicts the idea of life evolving at all."
What does the origin of the universe (the Big Bang) have to do with life on Earth? Genesis fits very well with the Big Bang. Einstein admitted he had trouble accepting it at first because it was so consistent with christian dogma.
"2. ... accepting the evolution theory = rejecting the bible"
That doesn't follow at all.
3. "IMPOSSIBLE to accept ..."
Not impossible. Easy.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
when you don't understand my proposition, you ask for my clarification, not provide irrelevant responses or divert the topic. it's quite annoying for me to have to tell you to stay on the topic of discussion(it's like babysitting). your response to (1)is completely irrelevant obviously because you have a severe comprehension issue with what i meant in the first place. We're not talking about the Big Bang here. We're talking about EVOLUTION. okay? for your god's sake, stay focused with the topic.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"We're talking about EVOLUTION. okay? for your god's sake, stay focused with the topic."
You are the one who brought up "origin of the universe" which happened billions of years before evolution started.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
see, i knew you were illiterate. please READ WHAT I SAY. "BIBLE'S EXPLANATION for the origin of universe."
repeat with me. BIBLE'S EXPLANATION, BIBLE'S EXPLANATION, BIBLE'S EXPLANATION, BIBLE'S EXPLANATION - which specifically states the universe was created 6000years ago and all life was created at the instant, not evolved.
really..getting a simple message across to another human being should not be such an excruciating process. please read EVERYTHING i say from now on before you respond
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
here's what my proposition(1) is saying:
"1.the Bible's explanation for the origin of universe[which says God created the Universe and all the life. in other words, each organism were created at the instant to the way they look now, NOT evolved over millions of years from electrons or sing cell] directly contradicts the idea of life evolving at all."
if you now understand, tell me whether you agree or not. then provide explanation.
if you STILL DON'T understand, ask me to clarify again.
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
The problem is that the Bible doesn't say: "each organism were created at the instant to the way they look now". I certainly don't think they were. Humans don't look like they did even decades ago. Check out the football all-district teams for 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000. If you look each decade the linemen will be about 1/2 inch to an inch taller and 5 to 10 lbs heavier than the previous decade. For a longer scale, check out a coat of armor from the 1600s. The guys who wore them were tiny.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
so, to rephrase what you say, you DON'T agree to my proposition(1) because you believe the Bible and the Evolution Theory complement each other.
see, listen Ms.Illiterate, if you actually READ my second comment on this page, notice i said, "please don't even try to argue that the bible can be somehow interpreted to embrace evolution." Now, i clearly see that you ARE trying to argue that very thing. See, if you gave me this kind of reponse to state your position on that part earlier,
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
our discussion wouldn't have BEEN SO LONG. thanks to your superb comprehension skills, i had SO MUCH fun wasting time with you.
your last reponse was ALL i needed. i'm not going to try to convince you and again go through the excruciating and time-consuming process to make you understand a SIMPLE FACT that the BIBLE CANNOT complement the Evolution Theory. The Bible says the Earth is 6000yrs old. Evidences from Evo Theory DO NOT. try to argue a fact, i must believe you are just simply retarded
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"Bible says the Earth is 6000yrs old"
IT DOES NOT !!! There are no dates in the Bible. Are you a Young Earth Creationist or get your information about the Bible from YECs? Quote a chapter and verse for your 6,000 years date. And don't go adding up geneologies, that has nothing to do with the age of the Earth, it just links you to Adam leaving the garden. Plus it has always been common practice to skip unimportant members in the chain of geneologies, as they were passed down by memorization.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
puhahaha get lost you are ridiculous. stop wastin my time i won't try to convince you that the Bible doesn't complement the Evolution Theory. all Christians that have ever existed since the beginning of Christianity until recently believed the Earth is 6,000yrs old. geneologies might not prove EVERYTHING, but NOTHING in the Bible suggests the Earth is billions of years old or life evolved. believe in your own little customized christianity all you want, no other christians will care about them
iranjackheelson 3 years ago
"all Christians that have ever existed since the beginning of Christianity until recently believed the Earth is 6,000yrs old"
Wrong again. The 6,000 year date was first proposed by Bishop Ussher in the 1600s. Christianity had been around a millenia and a half before the idea ever came up.
So you said the Bible says the age of the earth is 6,000 years old. Do you admit it doesn't? Because that idea is just a 400 years past Bishop's musings, not something biblical.
ShaundalynChic 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
cut out your bullshit and trivial nitpicking on details.. you know it's true that most of christians believe the Earth is 6000yrs old. even if they didn't, almost all of them are against the Evolution Theory. they, the majority, don't even approve your point of view, and you as a christian. so in fact, you aren't even a christian and aren't entitled to in anyway whatsoever to present your views as legitimate christian views. you can't customize religion, it just doesn't work that way
iranjackheelson 3 years ago