If Stripe spells out the challenge then someone will call him on it. But he will fall back on his usual and not respond. Man up? Too late for that.
Pot, kettle, black.Admittedly, there seems to be some debate over the matter, but the knee-jerk reaction of evolutionists to a trivial assertion by a YEC shows how utterly committed they are to contrarianism rather than rational discourse.
I see. So you are talking about psychological states and mythological fantasies.By being I mean one consciousness under God which all creation is.
This is something that I think people should really take some time to consider in detail.There is evedint intent through out all creation. It all strives for the same goal; the best existence possible.
And what do you think free will is? The freedom to choose to leap over a building in a single bound? The freedom to make ethical choices of which religious zealots would disapprove?Due to free will all humans have The potential for positive and negative e effects relating to our surroundings, and other life. We seem to be the only creatures hell bent on destroying our chances at meaningful life along with the rest of life on earth.
Both christianity and science need mystery. But while science sees mystery as a challenge to explain, christianity has to protect mystery for its own survival.What is your point? The op asked if science and Christianity were linked and gave the example of evolution. It has little to do with if scientist think humans are pertinent to existence or not.
An electron.Tell me of a single thing that doesn't go allong a preordained path other than humans.
So you would rather everyone just agreed with you? I'm not being personal here; I would rather discuss ideas. But your ideas strike me as not very well thought-through. I am also keen to learn. What can you teach me?Your negativity is not welcome.
Whatever it takes. That's the evolutionists' unspoken motto.So asking you to spell out the challenge is running way from the alleged challenge?
Whatever it takes. That's the evolutionists' unspoken motto.
Humans aren't born of one parent. Humans don't walk again after they have been judicially executed. So, myth.No myth.
Two religious platitudes. Let me know when you have something meaningful to say.Everything goes along a preordained path in order for the universe and existence to work as we know it. You can call it evolution. Evolution is the product of being that all has in order to be.
Why not?Even if the universe or big bang came to be from absolutely nothing, it couldn't have started itself if it is only nothing.
Two more platitudes.The laws you speak of were set in motion because they where what worked for creation. This was caused by creation.
The Big Bang didn't release light at the start. And don't forget that your mythology has the earth created before the light. If you aren't using Genesis, then what the heck are you using?Remember, let there be light i.e. the big bang.
Responsibility for what? This is another religious platitude. We can pretty much completely explain the phenomenon of the conscience with respect to our survival in tribal groups, and the selection pressure that has.Free will is your conscience. It allows us to wander off the path that all other existence conforms to. It is a gift with great potential and responsability.
Huh?Just because your biased knowledge that is based on manipulated religions doesn't add up within scientific examination doesn't mean that the truth does not.
Religious platitude.God is all existence,
Your universe has intent. Mine doesn't.you could refer to it as the universe if it made you feel better.
Because it is a lie, perpetrated to make the believer feel better.So how is that selfish to try and get people to unify with the universe or creation or God?
Good grief.Electrons are only half protons are the other. They have order.
Maybe the sarcasm is necessary.Questions are great and very welcome, needless sarcasm and negativity are not needed to ask a question, or make a statement. Thanks.
Nope.
Evolution, regardless of prefix, is bunk.
Evidence easily shows that "micro" evolution contains no random mutations and no natural selection.
Yeah. I'm losing hair, therefore: EVOLUTION! :nono:
We must realize that science and Christianity deny evolution if we are honest and intelligent about our discernment of both.
Math is science. lain:
Evolutionists do not think math is science. lain:
Something so trivial should be simple to agree with, but not when a YEC says it.
:yawn:
:yawn:
Wake us up when you've got a rational argument.
No?
This guy thinks it is.
No?
These guys think it is.
Admittedly, there seems to be some debate over the matter, but the knee-jerk reaction of evolutionists to a trivial assertion by a YEC shows how utterly committed they are to contrarianism rather than rational discourse.
Evolutionists hate reading.
It agreed with me. I wouldn't have posted it otherwise. :idunno:
However, it seems clear that this subject is something of a philosophical quagmire. I just thought Alwight's comment showed a slight flaw.
Though I notice the evolutionists have seized upon a rabbit trail to deflect from the objection being made. Typical.
It doesn't help to "follow through" when you can't read.
Evolutionists will do anything to show that they are arguing with a YEC. They hate the notion that one of them might have said something correct, no matter how trivial.
:kook:
Evolutionists hate reading.
You can't read and you call me a failure.
Congratulations on steering the conversation as far away as possible from the challenge issued to your precious evolutionism.
I haven't made a mistake.
Evolutionists hate reading.
That's right. The only problem here is the evolutionists, who will do anything to make sure the conversation travels as far away from the challenge to their evolutionism as possible. They will latch on to anything as long as their precious religion is protected.
Evolutionists hate reading.
Whatever it takes. That's the evolutionists' unspoken motto.
I don't find any of this as entertaining and hilarious as I feel I have the right to expect.
Stuart
I was being specific about christianity. But the conclusion that there is no god of the kind you believe in, or any intelligence behind the universe, is based entirely on the complete lack of any unambiguous evidence for any such thing. You can believe, but you have absolutely no good reason to do so.Again just because you are confused on some smaller issues doesn't mean that there is no God or creator or creation or existence or universe.
Natural selection doesn't have goals. Evolution happens in the direction of being fittest for survival and reproduction. When you think about it, those criteria are obvious.Something meaningful? Look you think evolution is some thing evidently, all I'm sayin is that it is pertinent to Productive existince, so what is your problem with what I said? Note; disliking me has little to do with theoretical discussion, and isn't a viable answer as far as I am concerned. Really, though, If you are trying to convince me that evolution is some survival of the fittest thing that at the same time has nothing to do with advancing to our highest capacity, then you might as well just not bother. Really.
No. What I said was that the total energy of the universe is zero. That means that the net total of nothing came from an original state of nothing. The matter and energy we see are borrowed from the gravitational energy of the inflation of the universe. The gravitational energy is negative; we are in debt to it.Wow did you really say that. 0 equals 0 therefore nothing cannot create anything.
Do you not believe I am serious?I'm not talking to sound interesting, or fun to you. I am speaking of truth in existence. Sorry it doesn't tickle your fancy. Don't ask next time, I guess. Why would you pretend to want real answers if all you want fun time stories. If you want stories then you should be a big fan of the bible which according to your hypocritical self is a fairy tail or myth. If you don't want to have serious discussion, fine. But stop pretending like you do, please.
Ha•'a•retz, the word used in Genesis 1:1 means earth or land.Earth is the word used for matter. In the first few lines. No wonder you are so lost. Your comprehension isn't too great. That's okay though, that's why I'm here.
A platitude is a statement that is written to appear impressive, but actually doesn't mean anything. Your platitudes were exactly that.Wow you are really misusing the word platitude. Look it up maybe? Uhm, no, I, actually, am the first instance of the gift of free will being linked to potential, or responsability. So it is the opposite of a platitude.
I wouldn't worry about going to hell if I were you. It too is a lie.Even if I was lying about it(which I will never due because I'm not really down with goin to hell) it still wouldn't be selfish you little ball of angst.
I see that by resorting to a sort of name-calling informality you have run out of proper arguments. I guess that must mean you agree with me. I can't remember anyone giving up so quickly before.You can keep with the sarcasm if it helps you cope with being wrong about everything you posted, whatever. I'll just consider you little stewy till you fix you.
Thanks, little stewy.
Whatever it takes. That's the evolutionists' unspoken motto.
Many Christians dislike even uttering the word evolution, but we must be intelligent in our walk with Christ.
While we lack solid scientific proof of macro evolution, we understand microevolution occurs on a constant basis. The idea that Organisms can change and adapt is very easy to prove.
We must realize that science and Christianity can not only coexist, but complement one other if we are honest and intelligent about our discernment of both.
What think ye?
There is evolution with species, you can breed dogs to get different dogs, but they are always going to be dogs.
You cannot breed frogs long enough to produce kittens.
Genesis 1 everything after its kind. Kind is the word genos, from which we get the biological term genus.
In the horse, donkey world, you can breed a horse with a donkey and get a mule, but mules do not reproduce, the horse and donkey though close, are not close enough to produce reproducing animals.
there is no natural selection and there is not random mutation. Also, "species" is a vague and malleable term, only useful for evolutionists who want to speak in ways that hide the fact that they assume the truth of their ideas and use it as evidence.There is evolution with species.
The bulk of it. Likely not all.1. If you buy the Noah story, then all intra species change happened in the last 4000 years or so, correct?
The limited size of the genome and the fact that random changes does not mean infinite changes. Put simply, a genome can be altered only so much before further changes would be terminal.What prevents change from going beyond the species level?
And nor is there any natural selection.Dogs can be bred to get different dogs, but there is no evolution, or speciation, involved.
That's the thing with YEC evolution deniers. They believe in breakneck speeds of evolution.1. If you buy the Noah story, then all intra species change happened in the last 4000 years or so, correct?