I believe that the Bible is the Word of God. How the universe, this solar system, Earth, animals and all that jazz came about is His business... we are not given insight into a process or a time frame. But it does say (and I do believe) Man was created by God specifically from dust. We are his creation... and He intentionally made Adam, the first, like it says in Genesis. I love the proofs science offers, but ultimately I will trust God's Word--the Word of He who gives me eternal life.
Yes, but don't play dumb. The topic being discussed is clearly biological evolution. The Theory of Evolution is not at all tied to space, time, planets, our universe, chemical production and equilibrium; it is tied to biological development and variation. i.e. The topic being discussed.
The hair covering Kabane's eyes speaks volumes...
Evolution is not at all consistent with the biblical account of creation. The god you (Kabane) worship is not the God and Father of Jesus, but the god of the Kabbalistic Pharisees.
@Kabane: You say the implications are miniscule? LOL! It's just that you don't live out the (il?)logic of evolution. You make an intellectual game out of it instead. Professing to be wise... you know the rest.
Actually, there are several different Darwin's finch species coexisting on many (all?) of the Galapagos Islands. A beautiful example of niche partitioning through natural selection.
lol i've realized something. has anyone else noticed that evolutionists speak a whole lot slower when they are responding to a creationist's statements? i saw this in a Hovind debate too. i think it's really funny. creationists seem to be on their toes more than evolutionists. what does that tell you?
@Kabane52 He's not an idiot. But you are. Evolution is fact. Look at the fossil records. Animals were much larger in the past. Things change over time. Look at cats, wolves, bears, elephants. They were all much larger. Look at prehistoric reptiles. Look at early ape like man bones that been dug up. Why do you Christians ignore physical evidence? Seriously. It get's old. And what's up with the hair over your eyes? Are you trying to be cute? You look like a fucking mushroom.
i have a question about human evolution.(dont worry,i accept evolution) how does natural selection work in the todays western world? all people reproduce and there doesnt seem to be qualities survivin over others. weak and strong seem to reproduce equally, smart and stupid. and if this is true,and natural selection no longer applies,due to the nature of mutations,will we start to degenerate??
@Jmcmusick You seem to be focused on disproving the theory of Evolution instead of providing evidence that Creation is true. Even if Evolution was proven untrue tomorrow there would still be no reason to believe in the Creation account (no evidence).
he just said that magic words..."we both interpret those verses differently"...this is what make a joke out of all scripture...scripture is scripture, and will be interpreted differently...therefore, it will be followed differently...so, what is the point of following a particular written word, if it will be interpreted and followed differently?...that scripture suddenly loses all solidity...religion is religion for a reason..(cont)
Hey kabane I noticed that that video that you and venomfangx made together called creation vs evolution is taken down. You two are on bad terms again???
Does Venomfangx ever think outside of his 'box'? Of course he doesn't. Perhaps he should though...maybe by allowing everyone to comment on his videos would be a good place to start.
he had a video that said comments open on it, it had over 1000 comments but deleted it... his settlement for Tf00t also has over 1000, but his newest asking for a camera only has 17
VenomFangX is the one who covers his ears, censoring comments and what not. When he spits out these "facts" in his videos, people act like he made a mistake. I think the truth is that he knows all of these facts that he pretends to screw up and he purposely lies so creationists will cheer for him. Which is why he censors comments because he doesnt need to prove his point, he just needs to make sure they don't hear anyone elses point. He knows the facts, he just lies out of desperation.
There is no FACT at all to PROVE evolution, that is why it's called a THEORY. Go back to school and pay attention this time, kid. Wait. On second thought, don't. School is why you're so fkn stupid to begin with.
Wow, you are stupid. Theory means explanation of facts. A fact is a piece of data. Theories explain facts and laws, they are the pinnacle of science. The THEORY of gravitation. Atomic THEORY. Cell THEORY.
Theory - hypothesis: a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena. If there are ANY facts at all on a particular subject, then it is no longer a theory. You are so stupid it is unmeasurable.
Theory of gravity? You keep proving how stupid you are kid. There is no theory of gravity, but there are LAWS of gravity. That is because when facts and scientific data proved that there is gravity, then it ceased to be a theory and became such a reality that we have LAWS of gravity, much the LAWS of physics that have been proven with scientific fact. So, as long as the THEORY of evolution continues to be called a theory, it will prove that there are NO FACTS to support it.
LOL. You have no idea what you are talking about. The law of gravity describes what gravity does. The theory of gravity describes how it does it. (see: general relativity theory)
Physics proves that order can't come from something as dis-orderly as an explosion. If I blow up my house are all the pieces going to land as a better house? So how do they explain such perfection in ecology and perfection in the universe from something as violent as an explosion?
Furthermore, if in fact all this happened by chance, then the very thought processes that make up who you are were formed by chance. Therefore, you can't even trust your own intellect. Put THAT in your fkn wheaties.
Ugh, you are a moron. The Big Bang wasn't a disorderly explosion as you envision it, it was the rapid expansion of space time. The matter was organized by gravity. Evolution isn't chance.
You are so far from intelligent it's laughable. You talk shit across the net cause you know people can't reach you. If I ever saw you in real life, you would end up crying like a little bitch after I slam your fkn head into the concrete.
Hey, I'm so glad that you just responded to my points about the big bang and evolution by telling me that you would physically assault me. Good job, you just made yourself look like even more of a moron.
How about the fact that Evolution DOES NOT disprove God, and God DOES NOT disprove evolution?? If we remember that, alot of people come out looking like idiots, including you.... Oh yeah, and that's very christian of you, smashing peoples heads and what not. Thats EXACTLY like a christian. When you have no evidence to support your cause, resort to violence. When you lose a debate, just kill your opponent so noone can hear his side.... Let it go, imbecile. You lose.
To the author, I am not here to impose anything but to discuss. The issue with believingboth evolution and the bible is the stark contradictions. Many verses in the bible cannot coincide with evolution even if you try to take it in a literal or none literal sense. If humans evolved over millions of years, how could adam and eve be the first and only humans? Where would that put the garden of eden? That would mean death came into the world before sin so whats the point of salvation?
Hey speaking as a Christian I would like to say I think you are wrong with the Gap theory. If God used the processes then why wouldn't he say so? As soon as you start to interpret Genesis in the way you have then you kinda doubt what the Bible said, and then you have to question the credibility of what the Gospels say. Jesus resurrected in 3 days & we can agree with that yes?, yet you believe the All Power God can't created the universe in 6 days? Hmmm you may have to test evolution yourself :)
I don't believe in the gap theory. I'm a day-ager. And you accept gravity I presume. Why didn't he say so in the Bible? Because it isn't a science textbook. No, I'm interpreting Genesis 1 in light of the Hebrew, that has no effect on the gospels whatseoever. I never said God couldn't create the universe in six days, I said he didn't.
Thanks for the reply =] I do accept gravity, I understand what you are saying completely. But God knows the future, and He would know of the controversy of evolution. If He used evolution then surely He would give it a mention by saying something evolutionary. In Isaiah 40:22 God says about the world being spherical which I gather was put in there because of the controversy of the world being flat and to prove to the science world - second part was moving off subject a bit though. 2 B continued.
You say God didn't create the universe in a literal six days, yes?
Then why would God write in Genesis 1:3 'And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day'. With the key words being THE FIRST DAY, God is showing us that He made THE first day ever when He said let there be light and He did so for the next 7 days. Which makes the days. Surely if you are correct then 1 day would be like a 1000 years (or whatever) you see what I am saying, He made the earth to rotate in 24 hours - a day
The word translated day is yom. Yom can also be translated "age". Evening and morning can mean beginning and end, I demonstrated this in my debate with Aaron.
Ok, I can see what you say but there is more evidence for a young earth :-) A lot more. Why have they not found any humans or animals pre 4500 years ago? As the earth is only 6000 years old. The earth looks more aged because of the flood and sin.
What evidence do you actually have to evolution fitting in with The Bible? If you give the Bible to read all the way through to 100 people who know nothing about it, then 100 guaranteed would say 6 days.
you wanna know why? As the Bible is written for everyone. Jesus accepts anyone. If the Bible is written in a way which everything has a hidden meaning (evolution in this case) then surely everything should be looked into deeper including the gospels.
Ask God tonight for the truth, rather than the text book or the internet. As in have a real sort of alone time with Him. Why do you think this idea has never taken off? Same reason lots of cults don't. God Bless and respond please =]
God doesn't interpret scripture for us. You are the type of "New Christian" which has this weirdo view of the Spirit giving us revelation on how to interpret the scripture. He doesn't do that.
Sorry mate, I am evangelical not 'weirdo'. I am not the one in a cult at the end of the day mate. I know it wasn't written in English, best translated is KJV. Which I use. So you don't believe that the Holy Spirit can rain down on you and give you passages to link to everything, that song writers don't get inspiration from it? I don't know if you have heard of Keith Green or Chris Tomlin but give it a listen. I have experienced the Spirit - It's Amazing :-)
Yeah. Evangelical. The evangelical church is currently being ravaged by anti-intellectual nonsense that holds to a package of weird Mormon esque doctrines, such as the one you hold about the Spirit interpreting the text for you. Mormons experience emotion as well. Emotion is not the spirit. Listening to Christian music may get you a pleasant tune, but won't inform you about biblical scholarship.
And LOL @ your KJV onlyism. The KJV is perhaps the worst version out there besides the JST and the NWT. It includes several inauthentic passages such as the ending of Mark, John 8, and 1 John 5.7. It also mistranslates passages like "end of the age".
HAHA at your comment about KJV. I could not disagree more. Why? As The King James Bible is God's preserved Word in English today. How do I know that? As God promised that He would preserve His word (Psalms 12:6,7).
Next, why would you say it is the worst? Some of the translators where killed for their faith, this Book was forged in blood, sweat, and tears by humble people in 1600s which is renowned for English Literature.
And finally, you say that the fossil is from the flood. You asked me why there are no fossils dating from before 4400 years ago, and when I provide them, you say it was from the flood. You are using the young earth paradigm to evidence the young earth paradigm. Blatant circularity.
Do not call me a Mormon-as Mormons are fools, . That annoys me more than anything. Just because I called your belief a cult (which it is). Can we finish this in message form please? As I have tooo much to write. KJV erm mate that is actually the most accurate one actually. I don't just use that I use NIV and The Message (well sometimes)
You obviously have not listened to Keith Green then. Powerful music.
There is no evidence for a young Earth. Uh, we have found fossils dating from before 4500 years ago. LOL.
Sure, maybe if they read it in English. Newsflash. The Bible wasn't written in English. It wasn't written specifically for us, it was written to the people in the time in which it was written. To understand it properly, you need to study scholarship.
Oxy, they HAVE found humans and animals pre 4500 years ago. They've found animal fossils that are MILLIONS of years old. That was a claim from ignorance.
Okay if you say so then okay then. I am pretty bored with talking about the flood so don't expect a reply. They have never found one to be millions, carbon dating was proved long ago to not actually be accurate at all for example, they found mammoths and said the bones were 10000years old and the skin to be 150000 years old - for example. If you personally find one to be millions of years old then please contact me.
If you personally find one to be just a few thousand years old then please contact me, dumbass. You should try science - it works a helluva lot better then "god". Example: Medicine (which we wouldn't have without science) works about 99% better then prayer (since only 1% of prayers are actually answered).
Your first point had nothing to do with what I said. The second one was pointless as well - 1% does not prove that prayer works, but the opposite. Your third point is true but just because there are fossils that are in the range of a few thousand years doesn't mean ALL fossils are. Scientists have also found fossils that are millions of years old - why do you trust them when they agree with you but not when they disagree? I'm sure any real scientist is about 5 times as knowledgable as you (tbc).
And your fourth point. I wasn't saying you don't use science. The fact that you are using a computer only proves my point - a computer wasn't created by a God answering someone's prayer, but rather by someone using science. YOU are the one who needs to think about what they write next time.
"You should try science - it works a helluva lot better then 'god'."
The only problem with that logic is that you would have to ignore the possibility that God purposefully put into existance the substances that could be used to cure illnesses. Its be sited in many health related studies that most NATURAL nutritional cures work alot better than drugs. I think it is vitamine B17 found in the seed of an apricot is far mroe effective in treating cancer than chemo therapy and ALOT less harmful.
You must also understand a common misconception about prayer. There is a defference between an answered prayer, and a prayer answered "yes or no". You must also understand that not all prayers are answered n the way we expect. If you pray for God to save you from a flood, a speed boat comes by and you say "no thanks Im waiting for God to save me" in my opinion he just did, and you let that boat go away.
If I told you to pray to a milk carton, you would laugh at me. I would then say, Just do it, the milk carton answers prayers in the form of Yes, No, or Wait. So, you pray for money (for example). Immediatly the next day you get a raise - so you would say the milk carton answered your prayers with a "Yes". Imagine you never got the money - well then, it just wasn't the milk carton's will that you have it. Let's say you get the money in one year - the milk carton obviously said "wait". Now,
Let's change what I just said. Let's substitute the word "god" wherever it says "milk carton". You see? Prayer doesn't work, it just appears that way.
If you compare God to an object that does not fully scope the concept of God in his infinite power than the analogy fails. Its like me saying "If an ant told you that you evolved from a sushi dish 3 ga-billion years ago and privided circumstancial evidence, would you believe it?"
You see where they do not compare? This is called the Red Herring falicy very common in amatuer arguements.
Also do not assume prayer works in the way you would expect. God aint a genie in a bottle as some think.
The analogy does not fail. You could substitute the word "Allah" or "Flying Spaghetti Monster" in for "God" and the analogy would still work - even though those are also supposedly infinitely powerful beings.
But common sense would awake and say.. wait a milk carton is made out of perishable man-made material that can be burnt and destroyed. Now if i was to put my trust in an inanimate object that I am more powerful than, then were would the common sense be in that. However if an omnipresent mass of energy was said to answer prayers, and I tried it and it worked, maybe that would be given some thought. You cannot use a perishable item as a metaphor for God as they do not compare equally.
Oxygen, Carbon dating is only accurate up to 55,000 years ago and when used properly is incredibly accurate. We know this because we date objects whose date we already know of through historic records and references (datin the Colloseum for instance). Now about your mammoth. It turns out that that is just a mistake made by creationists that has never been corrected. It first appears in Walt Browns book and was proliferated by Kent Hovind. ExtantDodo addresses it in one of their videos.
You say yom can be translated as Age. Which shows you clearly have not done ANY research, as if you look in a well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon is has several headings for the word 'Yom' and it defines the creation days (Genesis 1) as ordinary days under the heading of day as defined by evening and morning.
Also outside Genesis 'yom' is used over 350 times translated as ordinary day - so why is Genesis 1 an exception. Message Back.
Such as the Brown, Driver, Briggs lexicon, which they give a number of meanings for the word 'yom' depending upon context. They give for yom's meaning an ordinary day happens to be Genesis chapter 1. The reason is obvious. Every time the word yom is used with a number, or with the phrase 'evening and morning', anywhere in the Old Testament, it always means an ordinary day.
No. You are incorrect. I assume you have a basic knowledge of church history. Calvinism versus Armianism is a big debate. Why didn't God lay it out clearly, knowing the future controversy? Why didn't he say: Total depravity. Unconditional Election. Limited Atonement. Irresistible Grace. Perserverance of the Saints? If God is to address every future Christian controversy, by your theology, he should have been explicit with Calvin and Arminius.
Any Christian who tends to agree somehow with evolution are ignoring what their belief system actually teaches and are in fact creating their own theology. face it the bible clearly depicts its telling of the origins of life, whether you choose to except it or not is your choice, but remember your repercussion could be you go to hell. lol
Hell is a result of the nonacceptance of the atonement of Jesus Christ, not one's beliefs regarding evolution. If I accept the atonement, my sin is atoned for, and therefore I will go to heaven. Just because you read your KJV english bible doesn't mean that's what the hebrew teaches.
actually i don't read the bible at all because it is crap so i'm sorry but you are the one reading the biggest load of crap in history. "I don't care if Darwin said it was incompatible, that doesn't mean it definitely is."- typical fundy response. that's like me saying i don't care if fruit loops are artificially flavored, there is a possibility they aren't, even while the ingredients tell me they are.
Oh you don't read the Bible because it's crap and you know it's crap...how? Oh, how stupid of you. Saying "typical fundy response" is not an argument against me. Uh, evolution is based on more than Darwin, Darwin was a gradualist, yet today we know punctuated equilibrium to be fact. You fail.
punctuated equilibrium is as valid as stephen hawkings theory of black holes, which he did rewrite after admitting to be incorrect. which both are better classified as observations rather than theories. stating it as a fact is a simple error on your behalf. and what exactly does this have to do with evolution contradicting the judeo-christian doctrine? remember i'm not the one claiming the earth to be 6000 years old, thats your bible.
Punctuated equilibrium is valid. Punctuated equilibrium contradicts gradualism. Darwin was a gradualist. Therefore, Darwin's views on evolution are not authoritative. You claimed that since Darwin believed biblical Christianity to be irreconcilable with evolution, that it is so. Other authorities on evolution disagree. I was refuting your argument that you pulled out of your latest dump. Actually, the Bible never dates the Earth.
ok would you rather me say richard dawkins believes in the same disposition? either way you look at it you cannot refute the fact that god created the universe in a week -the bible. i mean we could go back to the historical battles cited in the bible and date them back from the time line the bible gives in order to get a pretty good estimate on how long ago the bible claims god created everything. but then again that is a from a literal interpretation of the bible.
Dawkins departs from the consensus in that regard. Ugh. No, the Bible does not teach six day creationism, read my debate with Venom, where I refute that idea biblically. Uh, no. First of all, that assumes a six day interpretation. Second, the genealogies have gaps.
ok thats funny when in the bible it says 6 days, funny how you like to put your interpretation in your whole theology. take it for what it is the bible is crap and evolution disproves of its claims. which brings me to the conclusion that the bible is crap and shows no divine inspiration.
Funny how you totally ignore my arguments presented in my debate with VenomFangX and prefer to spit up the same crap that you spat up in the last comments.
maybe its because there is no "debate" with you and venomfangx anywhere that i am aware of. i guess you put your own interpretation on grammar as well. its actually pretty ironic that even the muslims try to claim science as a way to prove the validity of their qu'ran, but end up looking just as foolish as you do. however i will commend you for voicing your opinion on a subject many christians are ill-informed on. maybe they can learn something, then again your probably a heretic in their eyes.
You should have asked earlier. I never said science proves the Bible, I'm a historical apologist. I'm saying that the Bible is not scientifically screwy.
your stance is an oxymoron, if evolution is true then the bible is false, as evolution does not require a "creator god" to kick start our existence. you are just choosing both views to in a sense eat your cake and have it as well. i don't think you understand why the theory evolution was coined in the first place. it was because darwin (an atheist) was searching for the origin of our existence. if he was religious he wouldn't need to search since god created humans in his image- the bible
LOL. Gravity doesn't require God either, but it doesn't necessitate atheism. Darwin switched between deism and agnosticism, but he was never an atheist. He wasn't searching for our origin, he stumbled across it. Trust me, I know ten times more about the history of evolution than you do.
Gravity doesn't deal with any form of biology but you are missing the point, evolution directly disproves the book of genesis. If you read any of his excerpts you would find he fully disbelieves in the authority of the bible. You would also find him stating that Christianity wasn't supported by the evidence, and that he gave up on it during the middle of his life. So you see you are rather confused with your theology. and i highly doubt a 15 year old would know more than me about any subject.
You're missing the point em3. He's saying evolution and religious belief as compatible - as compatible as gravity and religious belief. Also, Darwin wasn't an atheist, and he wasn't searching for our origin - it was a big realization for him. Don't be a dumbass, you have two 15-year-old's here who DO know more than you about this subject.
as i stated before Darwin did state that evolution and Christianity were INCOMPATIBLE, when you have a book that states a form of creation occurring, how can you use evolution as a basis to validate its claims? it's true darwin did not like the term atheist, but his writings strictly show he did not believe one ounce in an intelligent god, nevertheless science and theism are incompatible due to the overbearing weight of the god variable.
No, it doesn't. Read my debate with VenomFangX at my website. The Bible supports an old Earth. And yes, I actually do know more than you, because I've read good stuff and you've read crap.
Kabane, for every comment you get stating you should "cut your hair", you should add an inch to your desired length of hair. I didn't know VFX was back.
you say your a christian and that you believe that the Bible is the word of God but yet you disregard the very first chapter of it! God created man, and got said let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life, and fowl that may fly above the earth, and let every living creature bring forth its kind.If that isn't clear enough go and read it your self.
I never denied it. I interpret it in light of the hebrew meaning of the words, such as hayah. Kind means nothing more than species (Strong's Lexicon) and can be translated "created many kinds" instead of "bring forth after their kinds" or "according to their kind". Kinds aren't immutable.
he probably knows it, except he makes his own strawman versions of it and says its "evolution" so he can use it against evolutionists, but hes been debunked, exposed as a fraud, and whatever else you can think. hes not worth shit.
Also - Darwin HIMSELF was a Christian, at least until his daughter died. But while formulating the theory, he was still Christian.
And he held of publishing his theory of evolution for 20 years because he was aware of the kind of firestorm it would raise, and he wanted to make sure that all his facts were solid.
Also as supporting evidence, he was aware of bird breeders who could develop new breeds of birds by artificial selection.
Again, Kabane, I would suggest you study the very real problems with evolution theory. It is NOT a demonstrated fact, no matter how loudly many claim it to be. Evolutionist Dr. Michael Denton has debunked that idea. I would also suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott M. Huse and "The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution" by Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith. Dr. Smith has 3 doctorates in science and knows his stuff...
...and if you, as a Christian, are going to push this theory, then you'd better really learn the fatal flaws in the theory. There is a reason my most atheists latch on to this theory. And that reason is because it gives them false comfort so that they can CLAIM they have evidence against the need for a Creator God. You are young, but that also means you can research the subject more carefully. In my mind, you simply haven't to this point. Evolution is NOT consistent with Christianity proper.
Inqoinf, I do not know what you are talking about. Denton is not an ID proponent. And the Dover trial was a sham, with a judge who simply ruled based on his own views of evolution. I read his whole opinion, and it was very clear that his decision was based on bias, not the facts.
Seemed pretty factual to me. You are only upset because your side didn't win. What I mean is why didn't Denton or some other goon show up to the trial as a credible witness. I read his whole opinion and I have no idea where you get that idea. (forum. cygnus-study. com/archive/index. php?t-6652. html
Perhaps it seemed pretty "factual" to you because you feel your "side" won. I do not know why Denton didn't show up (he could have been out of the country), but there were plenty of expert witnesses there. I wrote an article about the judge's 139 page opinion, and if you would like to read it, I can put the link in a message for you. It was so biased I almost threw up after reading it.
LOL...yeah, it would to your bias. But if you look more closely, as I have, you find that judge Jones simply followed his own bias toward the theory of evolution and blindly copied the ACLU material. Case in point. In his 139 page opinion, he fained objectivity by saying "To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect." That's strange, because prior to that statement, he spent over 20 pages DEFENDING what he claimed was "imperfect" without mentioning one imperfection...
...and then of course we have this little ditty: "Plaintiff's scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science...and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator." What a fascinating load of crock or grand ignorance. What did Dawkins say in The Blind Watchmaker?
I agree with you. But for fuck sake get a haircut!
deepskanker 2 months ago
I honestly wish I started to learn about Evolution at your age...
By the way, check out my videos.
treasuredroperX 5 months ago
This kid needs to be banned from YouTube for being an IDIOT.
Severe777 8 months ago
I believe that the Bible is the Word of God. How the universe, this solar system, Earth, animals and all that jazz came about is His business... we are not given insight into a process or a time frame. But it does say (and I do believe) Man was created by God specifically from dust. We are his creation... and He intentionally made Adam, the first, like it says in Genesis. I love the proofs science offers, but ultimately I will trust God's Word--the Word of He who gives me eternal life.
Alkene777 10 months ago
What?
"Both evolution and creation are perfectly consistant."
The two clearly contradict one another.
How one can accept the evidence supporting evolution, while having faith in creation, eludes me...
L00NGB00W 1 year ago
I think venomfangx's video is aimed at atheists.
Glad that theist's can come to the aid of the rational on occasion. :)
lracuda76 1 year ago
Comment removed
KaylaCorpse16 2 years ago
why are you wearing a helmet? :P just joking xD
vfx "what if evolution was not true"
then there would be no fossil record that dates back millions of years, but there is so what if you decided to face facts vfx? :P
spacecoke 2 years ago 4
what the hell?
get your facts right.
and get a hair cut..
ass
lalalandwoohoo 2 years ago
@lalalandwoohoo He does need a hair cut. He reminds me of the dog from Jamie and the magic torch.
lracuda76 1 year ago
@lracuda76 Yeah he looks exactly like my 14 old son - like small mushroom he he
TheWersum 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wait a second, you said you are a Christian that believes in evolution. The evolutionary theory is backwards to the bible.
Evolution: Death before man
Creation: Death after man
Evolution: Stars before earth
Creation: Earth before stars
etc.
You simply cannot believe in both. they are opposite teachings.
Muenchout 2 years ago
Evolution : Nothing to do with the universe or even the earth. Wow.. Another person that doesn't even know what evolution is.
SeanNijjar 2 years ago 3
Depends what type of evolution you are talking about. Biological evolution - speciation change.
Cosmic evolution - Change in planets / stars etc
Chemical evolution - Change in chemicals from one chemical to another. (They date rocks this way. Potassium - Argon dating)
Evolution simply means, "Change over time"
verzen 2 years ago
Yes, but don't play dumb. The topic being discussed is clearly biological evolution. The Theory of Evolution is not at all tied to space, time, planets, our universe, chemical production and equilibrium; it is tied to biological development and variation. i.e. The topic being discussed.
SeanNijjar 2 years ago 3
You don't have to take the Bible literally to be Christian.
TwilightAronXD 2 years ago
Wow.....dude, you are mistaken on what evolution is.
Quiet0wing 2 years ago
There actually is a link to your very first video being used in one of the lessons in my archeology class :D (In belgium btw)
Thought you should know that...
peclispe 3 years ago
The hair covering Kabane's eyes speaks volumes...
Evolution is not at all consistent with the biblical account of creation. The god you (Kabane) worship is not the God and Father of Jesus, but the god of the Kabbalistic Pharisees.
@Kabane: You say the implications are miniscule? LOL! It's just that you don't live out the (il?)logic of evolution. You make an intellectual game out of it instead. Professing to be wise... you know the rest.
P.S. The devils believe... and tremble.
bigNcube 3 years ago
I thought wallace was a deist
Christus94 3 years ago
Actually, there are several different Darwin's finch species coexisting on many (all?) of the Galapagos Islands. A beautiful example of niche partitioning through natural selection.
falcoperegrinus82 3 years ago
The Beagle, not the Bugle.
falcoperegrinus82 3 years ago
it shows how much research VenomfangX actually did before making his video's.
Inqoinf 3 years ago
why the hair in the eyes?
shanana000 3 years ago
my comment was directed to Theperrynator
Kylamb25 3 years ago
VenomFangx wont argue with christians??? how does he seek the truth? I knew he was ill learned, but that comment is completely foolish.
forelelyon 3 years ago
lol i've realized something. has anyone else noticed that evolutionists speak a whole lot slower when they are responding to a creationist's statements? i saw this in a Hovind debate too. i think it's really funny. creationists seem to be on their toes more than evolutionists. what does that tell you?
ThePerrynator 3 years ago
Wow, you are an idiot, aren't you?
Kabane52 3 years ago 2
@Kabane52 He's not an idiot. But you are. Evolution is fact. Look at the fossil records. Animals were much larger in the past. Things change over time. Look at cats, wolves, bears, elephants. They were all much larger. Look at prehistoric reptiles. Look at early ape like man bones that been dug up. Why do you Christians ignore physical evidence? Seriously. It get's old. And what's up with the hair over your eyes? Are you trying to be cute? You look like a fucking mushroom.
Severe777 8 months ago
LOL UR BAD
Kylamb25 3 years ago
@ThePerrynator and your evidence is???
I can give you a lot of sources of just the opposite.
Try CRoadwarrior (Christian) opposed to Christoper Hitchens
hahahaha
iannixxx 1 year ago
biblically, the world was created in six days.
ThePerrynator 3 years ago
Maybe you should go watch my videos instead of restating your assertion.
Kabane52 3 years ago 2
@ThePerrynator Why? Yom is a age indication, the bible in it's original form did not give any references on the duration in those periods...
treasuredroperX 5 months ago
i have a question about human evolution.(dont worry,i accept evolution) how does natural selection work in the todays western world? all people reproduce and there doesnt seem to be qualities survivin over others. weak and strong seem to reproduce equally, smart and stupid. and if this is true,and natural selection no longer applies,due to the nature of mutations,will we start to degenerate??
icandodgebullets86 3 years ago
Technology should be able to prevent that.
chert95 3 years ago
Comment removed
Jmcmusick 3 years ago
I read the message, I have a feeling you are an undergrad.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Comment removed
Jmcmusick 3 years ago
Your degrees, please?
Kabane52 3 years ago
I just want to say, Do you even have a high school degree...? i really dont think so
blueroos 3 years ago
I didn't claim to be a scientist. He did. So I'd like to see what earned him that status.
Kabane52 3 years ago
So you are an evolutionist Jmcmusick?.... or not?
ClayC33 3 years ago
Comment removed
Jmcmusick 3 years ago
Thanks!
ClayC33 3 years ago
can u give me link to the proof that evo. is wrong. i look for the truth and i havent found evo. wrong. so plzz if u have evidence please show me.
forelelyon 3 years ago
@Jmcmusick You seem to be focused on disproving the theory of Evolution instead of providing evidence that Creation is true. Even if Evolution was proven untrue tomorrow there would still be no reason to believe in the Creation account (no evidence).
atheistram 1 year ago
Comment removed
Jmcmusick 1 year ago
@Jmcmusick I am a neuropsychologist and know evolution to be fact. Would you like to debate me?
atheistram 1 year ago
Comment removed
Jmcmusick 1 year ago
Dude dont take Venom on your gonna lose!!! lol
ChromeDove 3 years ago
WTF are you tlaking about you fat fucking fagget get off your computer you all are a bunch of loosers cut your hair you fucking looser
pvticetea600 3 years ago
omg is that your real voice? you look like 5
KingKumaForever 3 years ago
and that reason is to control a certain mass of people..religion is the greatest tactic of mass control ever invented
itzahazylife 3 years ago
he just said that magic words..."we both interpret those verses differently"...this is what make a joke out of all scripture...scripture is scripture, and will be interpreted differently...therefore, it will be followed differently...so, what is the point of following a particular written word, if it will be interpreted and followed differently?...that scripture suddenly loses all solidity...religion is religion for a reason..(cont)
itzahazylife 3 years ago
are u a guy or girl i seriously cant tell
Flaginism 3 years ago
Your retarded, no girl has a voice like that.
AbdielAbiram 3 years ago
lol No offense, but if I were an evolutionist and you would represent all me then I would be really desperate and ignorant. No offense bro. ;)
LightOfTruth777 3 years ago
perhaps you are already desperate and ignorant...in which case you wouldn't have to worry about it :)
TheBiIIieJoe 3 years ago
Hey kabane I noticed that that video that you and venomfangx made together called creation vs evolution is taken down. You two are on bad terms again???
Knowntje 3 years ago
Does Venomfangx ever think outside of his 'box'? Of course he doesn't. Perhaps he should though...maybe by allowing everyone to comment on his videos would be a good place to start.
GoldenRatio 3 years ago
im pretty sure he does now,i saw some non christan comments on his latest videos
TorsoManza 3 years ago
Really?! Perhaps he has finally got the message! I must take a look at some of his recent videos and see this for myself...
GoldenRatio 3 years ago
he had a video that said comments open on it, it had over 1000 comments but deleted it... his settlement for Tf00t also has over 1000, but his newest asking for a camera only has 17
TorsoManza 3 years ago
How can u see and not get really itchy eyes???
SheepJumpFish 3 years ago
VenomFangX is the one who covers his ears, censoring comments and what not. When he spits out these "facts" in his videos, people act like he made a mistake. I think the truth is that he knows all of these facts that he pretends to screw up and he purposely lies so creationists will cheer for him. Which is why he censors comments because he doesnt need to prove his point, he just needs to make sure they don't hear anyone elses point. He knows the facts, he just lies out of desperation.
deepelmdesciple 3 years ago
Also Darwin was not the only person working on an evolutionary theory.
vanmartinmpg 3 years ago
Please get a haircut, young man! But good video.
vanmartinmpg 3 years ago
There is no FACT at all to PROVE evolution, that is why it's called a THEORY. Go back to school and pay attention this time, kid. Wait. On second thought, don't. School is why you're so fkn stupid to begin with.
deepbluesman 3 years ago
Wow, you are stupid. Theory means explanation of facts. A fact is a piece of data. Theories explain facts and laws, they are the pinnacle of science. The THEORY of gravitation. Atomic THEORY. Cell THEORY.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Theory - hypothesis: a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena. If there are ANY facts at all on a particular subject, then it is no longer a theory. You are so stupid it is unmeasurable.
deepbluesman 3 years ago
M-W definition of theory-
a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena .
THEORY of gravity. Atomic THEORY. Cell THEORY.
Are these now unproven?
Kabane52 3 years ago
Theory of gravity? You keep proving how stupid you are kid. There is no theory of gravity, but there are LAWS of gravity. That is because when facts and scientific data proved that there is gravity, then it ceased to be a theory and became such a reality that we have LAWS of gravity, much the LAWS of physics that have been proven with scientific fact. So, as long as the THEORY of evolution continues to be called a theory, it will prove that there are NO FACTS to support it.
deepbluesman 3 years ago
LOL. You have no idea what you are talking about. The law of gravity describes what gravity does. The theory of gravity describes how it does it. (see: general relativity theory)
Kabane52 3 years ago
that is not the SCIENTIFIC definition.
Law = what something does
Theory = what explains it
Bobalithmiss1 3 years ago 2
Physics proves that order can't come from something as dis-orderly as an explosion. If I blow up my house are all the pieces going to land as a better house? So how do they explain such perfection in ecology and perfection in the universe from something as violent as an explosion?
Furthermore, if in fact all this happened by chance, then the very thought processes that make up who you are were formed by chance. Therefore, you can't even trust your own intellect. Put THAT in your fkn wheaties.
deepbluesman 3 years ago
Ugh, you are a moron. The Big Bang wasn't a disorderly explosion as you envision it, it was the rapid expansion of space time. The matter was organized by gravity. Evolution isn't chance.
Kabane52 3 years ago
You are so far from intelligent it's laughable. You talk shit across the net cause you know people can't reach you. If I ever saw you in real life, you would end up crying like a little bitch after I slam your fkn head into the concrete.
deepbluesman 3 years ago
Hey, I'm so glad that you just responded to my points about the big bang and evolution by telling me that you would physically assault me. Good job, you just made yourself look like even more of a moron.
Kabane52 3 years ago
An explanation of a natural process is "Talking shit" now? XD
"Cats don't exist"
"Here's my pet cat"
"...You asshole."
BlackstarSirius 3 years ago
How about the fact that Evolution DOES NOT disprove God, and God DOES NOT disprove evolution?? If we remember that, alot of people come out looking like idiots, including you.... Oh yeah, and that's very christian of you, smashing peoples heads and what not. Thats EXACTLY like a christian. When you have no evidence to support your cause, resort to violence. When you lose a debate, just kill your opponent so noone can hear his side.... Let it go, imbecile. You lose.
deepelmdesciple 3 years ago
To the author, I am not here to impose anything but to discuss. The issue with believingboth evolution and the bible is the stark contradictions. Many verses in the bible cannot coincide with evolution even if you try to take it in a literal or none literal sense. If humans evolved over millions of years, how could adam and eve be the first and only humans? Where would that put the garden of eden? That would mean death came into the world before sin so whats the point of salvation?
Shintenzu 3 years ago
You are clearly a well spoken, rational, patient and intelligent young man. Why waste time on this guy so obviously addicted to ignorance?
L8nitedave 3 years ago
Cool. What were those words that you used kinda in the middle of the video? Were they eschatology, protology, etc?
Prey2Hunter 3 years ago
Hey speaking as a Christian I would like to say I think you are wrong with the Gap theory. If God used the processes then why wouldn't he say so? As soon as you start to interpret Genesis in the way you have then you kinda doubt what the Bible said, and then you have to question the credibility of what the Gospels say. Jesus resurrected in 3 days & we can agree with that yes?, yet you believe the All Power God can't created the universe in 6 days? Hmmm you may have to test evolution yourself :)
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
sorry didn't proof read it right, i meant 'The Alpha & Omega God can't create the universe in 6 days?'
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
I don't believe in the gap theory. I'm a day-ager. And you accept gravity I presume. Why didn't he say so in the Bible? Because it isn't a science textbook. No, I'm interpreting Genesis 1 in light of the Hebrew, that has no effect on the gospels whatseoever. I never said God couldn't create the universe in six days, I said he didn't.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Thanks for the reply =] I do accept gravity, I understand what you are saying completely. But God knows the future, and He would know of the controversy of evolution. If He used evolution then surely He would give it a mention by saying something evolutionary. In Isaiah 40:22 God says about the world being spherical which I gather was put in there because of the controversy of the world being flat and to prove to the science world - second part was moving off subject a bit though. 2 B continued.
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
You say God didn't create the universe in a literal six days, yes?
Then why would God write in Genesis 1:3 'And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day'. With the key words being THE FIRST DAY, God is showing us that He made THE first day ever when He said let there be light and He did so for the next 7 days. Which makes the days. Surely if you are correct then 1 day would be like a 1000 years (or whatever) you see what I am saying, He made the earth to rotate in 24 hours - a day
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
The word translated day is yom. Yom can also be translated "age". Evening and morning can mean beginning and end, I demonstrated this in my debate with Aaron.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Ok, I can see what you say but there is more evidence for a young earth :-) A lot more. Why have they not found any humans or animals pre 4500 years ago? As the earth is only 6000 years old. The earth looks more aged because of the flood and sin.
What evidence do you actually have to evolution fitting in with The Bible? If you give the Bible to read all the way through to 100 people who know nothing about it, then 100 guaranteed would say 6 days.
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
you wanna know why? As the Bible is written for everyone. Jesus accepts anyone. If the Bible is written in a way which everything has a hidden meaning (evolution in this case) then surely everything should be looked into deeper including the gospels.
Ask God tonight for the truth, rather than the text book or the internet. As in have a real sort of alone time with Him. Why do you think this idea has never taken off? Same reason lots of cults don't. God Bless and respond please =]
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
God doesn't interpret scripture for us. You are the type of "New Christian" which has this weirdo view of the Spirit giving us revelation on how to interpret the scripture. He doesn't do that.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Sorry mate, I am evangelical not 'weirdo'. I am not the one in a cult at the end of the day mate. I know it wasn't written in English, best translated is KJV. Which I use. So you don't believe that the Holy Spirit can rain down on you and give you passages to link to everything, that song writers don't get inspiration from it? I don't know if you have heard of Keith Green or Chris Tomlin but give it a listen. I have experienced the Spirit - It's Amazing :-)
That fossil was from the flood. LOL
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
maybe we should do this on messages as the character count is getting on my nerves. I do want to finish this as you seem like a good guy :-)
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
Yeah. Evangelical. The evangelical church is currently being ravaged by anti-intellectual nonsense that holds to a package of weird Mormon esque doctrines, such as the one you hold about the Spirit interpreting the text for you. Mormons experience emotion as well. Emotion is not the spirit. Listening to Christian music may get you a pleasant tune, but won't inform you about biblical scholarship.
Kabane52 3 years ago
And LOL @ your KJV onlyism. The KJV is perhaps the worst version out there besides the JST and the NWT. It includes several inauthentic passages such as the ending of Mark, John 8, and 1 John 5.7. It also mistranslates passages like "end of the age".
Kabane52 3 years ago
HAHA at your comment about KJV. I could not disagree more. Why? As The King James Bible is God's preserved Word in English today. How do I know that? As God promised that He would preserve His word (Psalms 12:6,7).
Next, why would you say it is the worst? Some of the translators where killed for their faith, this Book was forged in blood, sweat, and tears by humble people in 1600s which is renowned for English Literature.
hammiesheep 3 years ago
And finally, you say that the fossil is from the flood. You asked me why there are no fossils dating from before 4400 years ago, and when I provide them, you say it was from the flood. You are using the young earth paradigm to evidence the young earth paradigm. Blatant circularity.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Do not call me a Mormon-as Mormons are fools, . That annoys me more than anything. Just because I called your belief a cult (which it is). Can we finish this in message form please? As I have tooo much to write. KJV erm mate that is actually the most accurate one actually. I don't just use that I use NIV and The Message (well sometimes)
You obviously have not listened to Keith Green then. Powerful music.
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
There is no evidence for a young Earth. Uh, we have found fossils dating from before 4500 years ago. LOL.
Sure, maybe if they read it in English. Newsflash. The Bible wasn't written in English. It wasn't written specifically for us, it was written to the people in the time in which it was written. To understand it properly, you need to study scholarship.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Oxy, they HAVE found humans and animals pre 4500 years ago. They've found animal fossils that are MILLIONS of years old. That was a claim from ignorance.
Mthedh 3 years ago
Okay if you say so then okay then. I am pretty bored with talking about the flood so don't expect a reply. They have never found one to be millions, carbon dating was proved long ago to not actually be accurate at all for example, they found mammoths and said the bones were 10000years old and the skin to be 150000 years old - for example. If you personally find one to be millions of years old then please contact me.
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
If you personally find one to be just a few thousand years old then please contact me, dumbass. You should try science - it works a helluva lot better then "god". Example: Medicine (which we wouldn't have without science) works about 99% better then prayer (since only 1% of prayers are actually answered).
Mthedh 3 years ago
Don't worry and Kabane will back me up on this God is no delusion. Unlike what Mr Dawkins thinks, who has no experience on what/who God is.
1% prayers, so you are admitting to me that prayer works
:-)
I could find a fossil to be a few thousand years old. So could a lot of historians. Try in the Pyramids - there you are found you one.
I do use Science hence I am using a computer. You should try thinking about what you write next time please :-)
oxygenandco2 3 years ago
Your first point had nothing to do with what I said. The second one was pointless as well - 1% does not prove that prayer works, but the opposite. Your third point is true but just because there are fossils that are in the range of a few thousand years doesn't mean ALL fossils are. Scientists have also found fossils that are millions of years old - why do you trust them when they agree with you but not when they disagree? I'm sure any real scientist is about 5 times as knowledgable as you (tbc).
Mthedh 3 years ago
...As you on this.
And your fourth point. I wasn't saying you don't use science. The fact that you are using a computer only proves my point - a computer wasn't created by a God answering someone's prayer, but rather by someone using science. YOU are the one who needs to think about what they write next time.
Mthedh 3 years ago
"You should try science - it works a helluva lot better then 'god'."
The only problem with that logic is that you would have to ignore the possibility that God purposefully put into existance the substances that could be used to cure illnesses. Its be sited in many health related studies that most NATURAL nutritional cures work alot better than drugs. I think it is vitamine B17 found in the seed of an apricot is far mroe effective in treating cancer than chemo therapy and ALOT less harmful.
Shintenzu 3 years ago
That does not prove God exists, at all.
Mthedh 3 years ago
You must also understand a common misconception about prayer. There is a defference between an answered prayer, and a prayer answered "yes or no". You must also understand that not all prayers are answered n the way we expect. If you pray for God to save you from a flood, a speed boat comes by and you say "no thanks Im waiting for God to save me" in my opinion he just did, and you let that boat go away.
Shintenzu 3 years ago
If I told you to pray to a milk carton, you would laugh at me. I would then say, Just do it, the milk carton answers prayers in the form of Yes, No, or Wait. So, you pray for money (for example). Immediatly the next day you get a raise - so you would say the milk carton answered your prayers with a "Yes". Imagine you never got the money - well then, it just wasn't the milk carton's will that you have it. Let's say you get the money in one year - the milk carton obviously said "wait". Now,
Mthedh 3 years ago
Let's change what I just said. Let's substitute the word "god" wherever it says "milk carton". You see? Prayer doesn't work, it just appears that way.
Mthedh 3 years ago
If you compare God to an object that does not fully scope the concept of God in his infinite power than the analogy fails. Its like me saying "If an ant told you that you evolved from a sushi dish 3 ga-billion years ago and privided circumstancial evidence, would you believe it?"
You see where they do not compare? This is called the Red Herring falicy very common in amatuer arguements.
Also do not assume prayer works in the way you would expect. God aint a genie in a bottle as some think.
Shintenzu 3 years ago 2
The analogy does not fail. You could substitute the word "Allah" or "Flying Spaghetti Monster" in for "God" and the analogy would still work - even though those are also supposedly infinitely powerful beings.
Mthedh 3 years ago
But common sense would awake and say.. wait a milk carton is made out of perishable man-made material that can be burnt and destroyed. Now if i was to put my trust in an inanimate object that I am more powerful than, then were would the common sense be in that. However if an omnipresent mass of energy was said to answer prayers, and I tried it and it worked, maybe that would be given some thought. You cannot use a perishable item as a metaphor for God as they do not compare equally.
Shintenzu 3 years ago
Oxygen, Carbon dating is only accurate up to 55,000 years ago and when used properly is incredibly accurate. We know this because we date objects whose date we already know of through historic records and references (datin the Colloseum for instance). Now about your mammoth. It turns out that that is just a mistake made by creationists that has never been corrected. It first appears in Walt Browns book and was proliferated by Kent Hovind. ExtantDodo addresses it in one of their videos.
AthynKronos 3 years ago
Reading through the messages, I noticed this.
You say yom can be translated as Age. Which shows you clearly have not done ANY research, as if you look in a well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon is has several headings for the word 'Yom' and it defines the creation days (Genesis 1) as ordinary days under the heading of day as defined by evening and morning.
Also outside Genesis 'yom' is used over 350 times translated as ordinary day - so why is Genesis 1 an exception. Message Back.
hammiesheep 3 years ago
A well respected lexicon is Strongs lexicon, go look there, it's where I got my information.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Sorry I missed a word:
A classic, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon
hammiesheep 3 years ago
Such as the Brown, Driver, Briggs lexicon, which they give a number of meanings for the word 'yom' depending upon context. They give for yom's meaning an ordinary day happens to be Genesis chapter 1. The reason is obvious. Every time the word yom is used with a number, or with the phrase 'evening and morning', anywhere in the Old Testament, it always means an ordinary day.
hammiesheep 3 years ago
No. You are incorrect. I assume you have a basic knowledge of church history. Calvinism versus Armianism is a big debate. Why didn't God lay it out clearly, knowing the future controversy? Why didn't he say: Total depravity. Unconditional Election. Limited Atonement. Irresistible Grace. Perserverance of the Saints? If God is to address every future Christian controversy, by your theology, he should have been explicit with Calvin and Arminius.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Any Christian who tends to agree somehow with evolution are ignoring what their belief system actually teaches and are in fact creating their own theology. face it the bible clearly depicts its telling of the origins of life, whether you choose to except it or not is your choice, but remember your repercussion could be you go to hell. lol
em3rica89 3 years ago
Hell is a result of the nonacceptance of the atonement of Jesus Christ, not one's beliefs regarding evolution. If I accept the atonement, my sin is atoned for, and therefore I will go to heaven. Just because you read your KJV english bible doesn't mean that's what the hebrew teaches.
Kabane52 3 years ago
actually i don't read the bible at all because it is crap so i'm sorry but you are the one reading the biggest load of crap in history. "I don't care if Darwin said it was incompatible, that doesn't mean it definitely is."- typical fundy response. that's like me saying i don't care if fruit loops are artificially flavored, there is a possibility they aren't, even while the ingredients tell me they are.
em3rica89 3 years ago
Oh you don't read the Bible because it's crap and you know it's crap...how? Oh, how stupid of you. Saying "typical fundy response" is not an argument against me. Uh, evolution is based on more than Darwin, Darwin was a gradualist, yet today we know punctuated equilibrium to be fact. You fail.
Kabane52 3 years ago
punctuated equilibrium is as valid as stephen hawkings theory of black holes, which he did rewrite after admitting to be incorrect. which both are better classified as observations rather than theories. stating it as a fact is a simple error on your behalf. and what exactly does this have to do with evolution contradicting the judeo-christian doctrine? remember i'm not the one claiming the earth to be 6000 years old, thats your bible.
em3rica89 3 years ago
Punctuated equilibrium is valid. Punctuated equilibrium contradicts gradualism. Darwin was a gradualist. Therefore, Darwin's views on evolution are not authoritative. You claimed that since Darwin believed biblical Christianity to be irreconcilable with evolution, that it is so. Other authorities on evolution disagree. I was refuting your argument that you pulled out of your latest dump. Actually, the Bible never dates the Earth.
Kabane52 3 years ago
ok would you rather me say richard dawkins believes in the same disposition? either way you look at it you cannot refute the fact that god created the universe in a week -the bible. i mean we could go back to the historical battles cited in the bible and date them back from the time line the bible gives in order to get a pretty good estimate on how long ago the bible claims god created everything. but then again that is a from a literal interpretation of the bible.
em3rica89 3 years ago
Dawkins departs from the consensus in that regard. Ugh. No, the Bible does not teach six day creationism, read my debate with Venom, where I refute that idea biblically. Uh, no. First of all, that assumes a six day interpretation. Second, the genealogies have gaps.
Kabane52 3 years ago
ok thats funny when in the bible it says 6 days, funny how you like to put your interpretation in your whole theology. take it for what it is the bible is crap and evolution disproves of its claims. which brings me to the conclusion that the bible is crap and shows no divine inspiration.
em3rica89 3 years ago
Funny how you totally ignore my arguments presented in my debate with VenomFangX and prefer to spit up the same crap that you spat up in the last comments.
Kabane52 3 years ago
maybe its because there is no "debate" with you and venomfangx anywhere that i am aware of. i guess you put your own interpretation on grammar as well. its actually pretty ironic that even the muslims try to claim science as a way to prove the validity of their qu'ran, but end up looking just as foolish as you do. however i will commend you for voicing your opinion on a subject many christians are ill-informed on. maybe they can learn something, then again your probably a heretic in their eyes.
em3rica89 3 years ago
freewebs(.)com/theisticevolution/debatewithvenomfangx.htm
You should have asked earlier. I never said science proves the Bible, I'm a historical apologist. I'm saying that the Bible is not scientifically screwy.
Kabane52 3 years ago
your stance is an oxymoron, if evolution is true then the bible is false, as evolution does not require a "creator god" to kick start our existence. you are just choosing both views to in a sense eat your cake and have it as well. i don't think you understand why the theory evolution was coined in the first place. it was because darwin (an atheist) was searching for the origin of our existence. if he was religious he wouldn't need to search since god created humans in his image- the bible
em3rica89 3 years ago
LOL. Gravity doesn't require God either, but it doesn't necessitate atheism. Darwin switched between deism and agnosticism, but he was never an atheist. He wasn't searching for our origin, he stumbled across it. Trust me, I know ten times more about the history of evolution than you do.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Gravity doesn't deal with any form of biology but you are missing the point, evolution directly disproves the book of genesis. If you read any of his excerpts you would find he fully disbelieves in the authority of the bible. You would also find him stating that Christianity wasn't supported by the evidence, and that he gave up on it during the middle of his life. So you see you are rather confused with your theology. and i highly doubt a 15 year old would know more than me about any subject.
em3rica89 3 years ago
You're missing the point em3. He's saying evolution and religious belief as compatible - as compatible as gravity and religious belief. Also, Darwin wasn't an atheist, and he wasn't searching for our origin - it was a big realization for him. Don't be a dumbass, you have two 15-year-old's here who DO know more than you about this subject.
Mthedh 3 years ago
as i stated before Darwin did state that evolution and Christianity were INCOMPATIBLE, when you have a book that states a form of creation occurring, how can you use evolution as a basis to validate its claims? it's true darwin did not like the term atheist, but his writings strictly show he did not believe one ounce in an intelligent god, nevertheless science and theism are incompatible due to the overbearing weight of the god variable.
em3rica89 3 years ago
I don't care if Darwin said it was incompatible, that doesn't mean it definitely is. He was agnostic, not atheist.
Kabane52 3 years ago
No, it doesn't. Read my debate with VenomFangX at my website. The Bible supports an old Earth. And yes, I actually do know more than you, because I've read good stuff and you've read crap.
Kabane52 3 years ago
get windows live messanger please :)
thoseofmiddlearth 3 years ago
dude cut your hair it sucks lol
TheEvilStatuex 3 years ago
lol
jezuzdecapitator666 3 years ago
Kabane, for every comment you get stating you should "cut your hair", you should add an inch to your desired length of hair. I didn't know VFX was back.
michamus 3 years ago
dude cut your hair
TheEvilStatuex 3 years ago
you say your a christian and that you believe that the Bible is the word of God but yet you disregard the very first chapter of it! God created man, and got said let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life, and fowl that may fly above the earth, and let every living creature bring forth its kind.If that isn't clear enough go and read it your self.
BennyMetal7 3 years ago
I never denied it. I interpret it in light of the hebrew meaning of the words, such as hayah. Kind means nothing more than species (Strong's Lexicon) and can be translated "created many kinds" instead of "bring forth after their kinds" or "according to their kind". Kinds aren't immutable.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Nah, I'll stay alive.
Kabane52 3 years ago
Evolution is too big of a concept to Venom to bother to learn it.
marcluc1988 3 years ago
he probably knows it, except he makes his own strawman versions of it and says its "evolution" so he can use it against evolutionists, but hes been debunked, exposed as a fraud, and whatever else you can think. hes not worth shit.
johndabomb44 3 years ago
VenomFangX's arguments would hold more water if he had actually learnt what evolution is. Evolution IS based on scientific evidence.
marcluc1988 3 years ago
What if there is no God. I ask that to many religious people and their brains kind of shuts off. "La la la. I can't hear."
marcluc1988 3 years ago
I know not from whence you muster the patience to deal with this blithering creo-tard.
eightfootmanchild 3 years ago
Get a haircut, faggot.
plopsack 3 years ago
Real mature. This kid's got more brains than you.
LiquidSpartan117 3 years ago
We're best friends, you idiot.
plopsack 3 years ago
And how in the name of Buddha was I suppose to know that?
LiquidSpartan117 3 years ago
Also - Darwin HIMSELF was a Christian, at least until his daughter died. But while formulating the theory, he was still Christian.
And he held of publishing his theory of evolution for 20 years because he was aware of the kind of firestorm it would raise, and he wanted to make sure that all his facts were solid.
Also as supporting evidence, he was aware of bird breeders who could develop new breeds of birds by artificial selection.
OccamKant 3 years ago
Again, Kabane, I would suggest you study the very real problems with evolution theory. It is NOT a demonstrated fact, no matter how loudly many claim it to be. Evolutionist Dr. Michael Denton has debunked that idea. I would also suggest you read "The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott M. Huse and "The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution" by Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith. Dr. Smith has 3 doctorates in science and knows his stuff...
CRoadwarrior 3 years ago
...and if you, as a Christian, are going to push this theory, then you'd better really learn the fatal flaws in the theory. There is a reason my most atheists latch on to this theory. And that reason is because it gives them false comfort so that they can CLAIM they have evidence against the need for a Creator God. You are young, but that also means you can research the subject more carefully. In my mind, you simply haven't to this point. Evolution is NOT consistent with Christianity proper.
CRoadwarrior 3 years ago
Well then, why did Denton tuck tail and run during the Dover ID trial?
Inqoinf 3 years ago
Inqoinf, I do not know what you are talking about. Denton is not an ID proponent. And the Dover trial was a sham, with a judge who simply ruled based on his own views of evolution. I read his whole opinion, and it was very clear that his decision was based on bias, not the facts.
CRoadwarrior 3 years ago
Seemed pretty factual to me. You are only upset because your side didn't win. What I mean is why didn't Denton or some other goon show up to the trial as a credible witness. I read his whole opinion and I have no idea where you get that idea. (forum. cygnus-study. com/archive/index. php?t-6652. html
Inqoinf 3 years ago
Perhaps it seemed pretty "factual" to you because you feel your "side" won. I do not know why Denton didn't show up (he could have been out of the country), but there were plenty of expert witnesses there. I wrote an article about the judge's 139 page opinion, and if you would like to read it, I can put the link in a message for you. It was so biased I almost threw up after reading it.
CRoadwarrior 3 years ago
yeah, send me a link.
Inqoinf 3 years ago
From the decision:
"The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts
of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the
Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the
seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and
moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious,
antecedents."
Sounds pretty good to me. What's your problem with it?
OccamKant 3 years ago
LOL...yeah, it would to your bias. But if you look more closely, as I have, you find that judge Jones simply followed his own bias toward the theory of evolution and blindly copied the ACLU material. Case in point. In his 139 page opinion, he fained objectivity by saying "To be sure, Darwin's theory of evolution is imperfect." That's strange, because prior to that statement, he spent over 20 pages DEFENDING what he claimed was "imperfect" without mentioning one imperfection...
CRoadwarrior 3 years ago
...and then of course we have this little ditty: "Plaintiff's scientific experts testified that the theory of evolution represents good science...and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the existence of a divine creator." What a fascinating load of crock or grand ignorance. What did Dawkins say in The Blind Watchmaker?
CRoadwarrior 3 years ago