Creation vs. Evolution

[6days]

Quote=gcthomas]I said that the article is wrong, since it says things that are not true and were never said by the scientists they quote. [/quote]
No you weasel... you said I was a liar fabricating things in the article.*
DavisBJ and Alwight had the class to admit if they made a mistake. You seemingly lack that class of character.*
REVIEW:
Gcthomas: "Yet you claimed that it said that galaxies were too well formed for the timing of the Big Bang, which was a fabrication (or, if you like, a blatant lie).*

So, why*did*you make the "too 'well formed'" claim, despite that being in neither the article or the original paper?

Ok...now lets look at what I actually said.
6days:*they are suggesting that galaxies at the outer edges of the observable universe are too "well formed" to have occurred right after the Big Bang

The article 6days referred to:*The most distant galaxies in our universe are*too well formed*to have just appeared directly after the Big Bang, which creates an entirely new conundrum.

GC... the OP was accurate.*
Pfffft... I suppose we can just dimiss this as another case of evolutionists jumping to faulty conclusions.*

 

[patrick jane]

But you live in self delusion, an alternative reality built on wishful thinking and quack science. Facts are just cognitive dissonance to you. Your religious pride wont allow you to concede the facts of real science.

Listen to you :rotfl: Urantia makes you incredible - not credible !!!

 

[Caino]

Caino, please read.

Matthew 19:4-5 KJV
(4) And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
(5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?


Jesus quoted Genesis, and affirmed that:

1) There was a beginning
2) In this beginning male and female were made (not evolved)
3) that God spoke the words credited to him in the Genesis account.

Jesus believed in special creation as described in Genesis. And why not? He's the one that created them in the first place, it was him speaking.

Ok, that's what you believe to be true based on how Jesus was rembered speaking in this instance. But the facts of the records preserved within the layers of the earth are at odds with this if in fact Jesus meant what you think he meant.

 

[Rosenritter]

Ok, that's what you believe to be true based on how Jesus was rembered speaking in this instance. But the facts of the records preserved within the layers of the earth are at odds with this if in fact Jesus meant what you think he meant.

Let's establish one point before proceeding to the second. We have records of Jesus endorsing the literal Genesis creation account. We have absolutely no records of Jesus denying the literal Genesis account. There's no solid basis to question that the record of his words are inaccurate. So moving on...

... now you raise another objection, that the records in the earth would be "at odds" with Genesis and Jesus of the gospels. Since we've established what Genesis and Jesus would mean when read in the normally accepted manner, would you care to define what you mean?

 

[gcthomas]

Quote=gcthomas]
Pfffft... I suppose we can just dimiss this as another case of evolutionists jumping to faulty conclusions.*

So you accurately reported the words of the article. Well done. Congratulations for not spotting the hugely obvious inconsistency in the article.

This is the important bit that we have moved on to:
To repeat a quote that is plainly false, given the referenced paper, is dishonest.

The article says this:
"Some have attempted to extrapolate how long it took for those too-well-formed distant galaxies to develop, such as researchers at Oxford University in the United Kingdom who estimated the whole universe might be as big as 250 times the size of our observable universe. "

Which as you now know is not true — the entire sentence is a combination of fabrications and misrepresentations. Since you now know it is not a true statement (the scientists quoted said no such thing, as you could check easily) then repeating a known falsehood makes you a liar. Reporting known falsehoods as truths is immoral where I grew up, is it not the same for Christians?

Will you reject the article as a poorly written or fabricated piece of writing, or do you stick with it despite the evidence?

 

[Caino]

Let's establish one point before proceeding to the second. We have records of Jesus endorsing the literal Genesis creation account. We have absolutely no records of Jesus denying the literal Genesis account. There's no solid basis to question that the record of his words are inaccurate. So moving on...

... now you raise another objection, that the records in the earth would be "at odds" with Genesis and Jesus of the gospels. Since we've established what Genesis and Jesus would mean when read in the normally accepted manner, would you care to define what you mean?

You haven't even established the first point beyond the fact that it is what you believe not what is true.

You are using the evil of legalism, the technicality of a giant leap when claiming that just because Jesus stated a truth that God created male and female in the theoretical beginning that he is endorsing a literal interpretation of Genesis. That's what the authoritarians of religions do, they establish their inherited writings of past generations of the same church government to be inerrant in order to enforce their authority. While this may preserve faith it ultimately stunts future growth because it inhibits reform.

When the writings of men are converted into the Word of God, sincere people end up believing things, not because they sound true to the mind God provides us, but because they are in the book.

The life that God created and evolved into what we know today, does in fact have male and female. So Jesus was correct on that point.

 

[6days]

Let's establish one point before proceeding to the second. We have records of Jesus endorsing the literal Genesis creation account.

I don't think there is much point in discussing with Caino. He won't debate logically. He just picks and chooses what he wants to believe, even when it is contrary to evidence. For example, I asked him previously to provide just one clear example of a contradiction in God's Word that effects the Message. He was unable, but still keeps repeating his same beliefs. Same would happen with science. He believes it contradicts God's Word, but can't give even one example.

 

[6days]

So*you accurately reported the words of the article.

Yes..... so why did you say I had 'fabricated' what was in the article? What should you say to someone when you are proven wrong after calling them a liar?*

(You can move goalposts after the apology)

 

[Caino]

I don't think there is much point in discussing with Caino. He won't debate logically. He just picks and chooses what he wants to believe, even when it is contrary to evidence. For example, I asked him previously to provide just one clear example of a contradiction in God's Word that effects the Message. He was unable, but still keeps repeating his same beliefs. Same would happen with science. He believes it contradicts God's Word, but can't give even one example.

I provided one of the many contradictions in the Bible, but your pride and faith in the Bible idol wont allow you to be honest.

Many layers, many floods, many remains of diverse life, on a 4+ billion year old planet. But you live in self hypnotized delusion which forbids an honest conversation.

 

[gcthomas]

Yes..... so why did you say I had 'fabricated' what was in the article? What should you say to someone when you are proven wrong after calling them a liar?*

(You can move goalposts after the apology)

You have misrepresented so much over the years, so the epithet is accurate. That a statement is merely accurately repeating someone else's lie does not really get you off the hook. So, do you reject the article now?

 

[6days]

So, do you reject the article now?

I understand its easier for you to try move goalposts than admit you were wrong. But discussion is pointless if you can just jump from one false claim to another.*
REVIEW:
GCTHOMAS claimed it was a blatant lie and a fabrication that the article said some distant galaxies were too well formed to fit with Big Bang timing.

THE ARTICLE says "The most distant galaxies in our universe are too well formed to have just appeared directly after the Big Bang, which creates an entirely new conundrum."

 

[Rosenritter]

I understand its easier for you to try move goalposts than admit you were wrong. But discussion is pointless if you can just jump from one false claim to another.*
REVIEW:
GCTHOMAS claimed it was a blatant lie and a fabrication that the article said some distant galaxies were too well formed to fit with Big Bang timing.

THE ARTICLE says "The most distant galaxies in our universe are too well formed to have just appeared directly after the Big Bang, which creates an entirely new conundrum."

Moving goalposts. Get used to it. Remember the "no evidence that man and dinosaur coexisted" claim? What happened after that? Goalposts were running as fast as they could. Stegosaurus was called a hippopotamus. Other examples plain out ignored. No honest agreement that it constituted evidence of co-existence. That would have enabled us to move forward.

 

[gcthomas]

Moving goalposts. Get used to it. Remember the "no evidence that man and dinosaur coexisted" claim? What happened after that? Goalposts were running as fast as they could. Stegosaurus was called a hippopotamus. Other examples plain out ignored. No honest agreement that it constituted evidence of co-existence. That would have enabled us to move forward.

You kept presenting evidence that had simple alternate explanations — the goalposts never moved, you just kept missing. But whatever, you are so convinced that your anti-science position is right, you will hang on to any old duff gen as if it were incontrovertible.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear Hedshaker,

It's been quite a while since I've heard from you. Too Long!! What's been up with the music biz? How are you feeling these days? I think Alwight passed away. He has not emailed me back for a while now. He could just be off the Internet, like a nursing home, but I don't think so. He was doing pretty bad last I spoke to him. Such a good man!! He asked me to pray that an angel would visit him near the end. I think he believed in God before he passed. When it comes down to facing death at the time it nears by, you need something more. It changes a whole person. By the way, he died from colon cancer. Will write more if I hear from you here!!

Peace & Cheerio, Matey!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear Stripe,

I realized that I haven't heard from you in a while. I've thought this a couple of times before since I came back to this thread, but kept getting sidetracked. Why don't you post more often again here?? Miss you!! Sure could use your help! I hope that all is going very well with you and yours!! I'm sorry that I had to leave this thread again for a while, but I do my best, irregardless. I hope that you, and everyone else here, can forgive me.

God Grant You Joy And Peace!!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

I provided one of the many contradictions in the Bible, but your pride and faith in the Bible idol wont allow you to be honest.

Many layers, many floods, many remains of diverse life, on a 4+ billion year old planet. But you live in self hypnotized delusion which forbids an honest conversation.

Dear Caino,

You seem to be caught nonplussed by the fact that the Urantia Book or Pages do not allow you an out for what you are saying. Otherwise it shakes up everything you believe. Yes, you can bet your sweet butt that Jesus declared Genesis to be the truth. Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, even his own end, which he wrote no longer after he had to go to another place to die in. Jesus said to us, most recently, "And if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." {see Rev. 22:18-19KJV}.

So Caino, you can definitely bet that Jesus put His Seal of Approval on the Bible. It is a beautfully-written piece of manuscript!! So excellent indeed, but you don't know that because you'd rather believe in the Urantia stuff. You hate being pulled away from your damning thread about the Urantia pages. You are misleading many people by your thread and it will cost you indeed. God doesn't like that. In essence, you are confusing many novice Christians and Catholics.

I have paid dearly for my mistakes. You still have yet to. You believe in a small amount of people who believe in the Urantia Book, rather than two billion++ who believe in the Bible. What do you gather from that?? I feel sorry for you because you will not let anything pierce your die-hard lies and intricate thread.

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear Stripe,

Why don't you post more often again here?? Miss you!! Sure could use your help! I hope that all is going very well with you and yours!! I'm sorry that I had to leave this thread again for a while, but I do my best, irregardless. I hope that you, and everyone else here, can forgive me.

God Grant You Joy And Peace!!

Michael

 

[Hedshaker]

Dear Hedshaker,

I think he believed in God before he passed. When it comes down to facing death at the time it nears by, you need something more.

No Michael, there is no evidence for anything more and I much prefer to remember Al for the genuine sceptic, atheist and honest free-thinker he truly was. You have not the slightest evidence that Al converted to your horrible beliefs before the end so you should, at the very least, have the good grace to keep your speculations about his state of mind at that time to your self. Or is talking ill of the deceased ok with you?

It changes a whole person.

What do you know about it? Nothing I suggest.

 

[Caino]

Dear Caino,

You seem to be caught nonplussed by the fact that the Urantia Book or Pages do not allow you an out for what you are saying. Otherwise it shakes up everything you believe. Yes, you can bet your sweet butt that Jesus declared Genesis to be the truth. Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible, even his own end, which he wrote no longer after he had to go to another place to die in. Jesus said to us, most recently, "And if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." {see Rev. 22:18-19KJV}.

So Caino, you can definitely bet that Jesus put His Seal of Approval on the Bible. It is a beautfully-written piece of manuscript!! So excellent indeed, but you don't know that because you'd rather believe in the Urantia stuff. You hate being pulled away from your damning thread about the Urantia pages. You are misleading many people by your thread and it will cost you indeed. God doesn't like that. In essence, you are confusing many novice Christians and Catholics.

I have paid dearly for my mistakes. You still have yet to. You believe in a small amount of people who believe in the Urantia Book, rather than two billion++ who believe in the Bible. What do you gather from that?? I feel sorry for you because you will not let anything pierce your die-hard lies and intricate thread.

Michael

Many of the billions who believe the Bible actually believe as I do that God set evolution in motion, that Gods helpers fostered evolution. They have common sense and an education which overrides superstition. I often hear from Christians that the YEC story of Genesis must be allegorical and not literal, that's how they deal with it.

Old earth evolution was obvious to me before I ever found the Urantia Book.

The apocalyptic writers added the silly threats of plagues to the Book of revelation, but because you believe Jesus wrote that warning, when he returns and has more to say it cant be added to the Bible. That's just dumb.

Its all very simple Michael, the Hebrew writers were just trying to present a consistent story of their history and their faith, they wrote in preacher speak. It was understood at the time to be pseudo-biographical. Later generations converted it into the word of God just like the church converted Paul's letters to the word of God.

But you aren't allowed to agree with me, so we remain at a disagreement.

 

[MichaelCadry]

No Michael, there is no evidence for anything more and I much prefer to remember Al for the genuine sceptic, atheist and honest free-thinker he truly was. You have not the slightest evidence that Al converted to your horrible beliefs before the end so you should, at the very least, have the good grace to keep your speculations about his state of mind at that time to your self. Or is talking ill of the deceased ok with you?

I'm not trying to talk about his death. I'm just wondering how you are doing lately. I'm not talking ill of the deceased. Where were you prior to his passing? You all ignored him and weren't there for him. I was and I know what were on his thoughts during the time before he left. I'm not saying that he didn't remain atheist except that he believed in angels. I could try to find an email from him, if I haven't erased them all, and let you find out the hard way. None of you had ANYTHING to do with him in his time near the end, when he was in need, now did you?? I was his REAL Friend!! He was a person to me, not an email buddy!! You speak of things you do not know about, Hed. C'mon, can't we ever chat about things we agree about? You don't know what dying does to a man! There's no where to turn for a friend at that time. Only to God or an angel. He was not all healthy like you. That's why you believe your way and he believed his way.

What do you know about it? Nothing I suggest.[/QUOTE]

Michael