God and Evolution

[ecco]

Tens of thousands of educated professionals in fields like biology, geology, and paleontology, over 100 years of research all come to the same conclusion: Evolution is Fact. You refuse to accept that. You believe that somehow all these people are wrong.

You, and a few other uneducated posters and bloggers, read stuff that some ignorant people believed 6000 years ago and are convinced that those people are right. There is no rational reason to arrive at that conclusion. The only explanation is very strong religious indoctrination.

You keep leaning on others, but rarely if ever do I see evidence of proof from supporters of the evolution theory here. Along with that, I see no proof beyond a reasonable doubt so far.

What do you mean "leaning on others"? Are you criticizing me for accepting the work of Tens of thousands of educated professionals in fields like biology, geology, and paleontology, over 100 years of research? Of course I do. Of course most rational people from all religious persuasions do.

The only people who reject this body of knowledge are Fundamentalist Creationists. You, and the few others like you, reject this because to accept it would completely destroy the mindset you have developed over years of fundamentalist indoctrination.

All you do is demand proof. When evidence is presented you reject by yelling - "that isn't proof" - "that doesn't prove anything" and occasionally, "Oh yeah, well wattabout!". Rinse and repeat.

The evidence is that Tens of thousands of educated professionals in fields like biology, geology, and paleontology, over 100 years of research all come to the same conclusion: Evolution is Fact.

I've asked, repeatedly, for you to state clearly and precisely how you account for the presence of man on earth - silence. Are you, somewhere in the deep recesses of your mind ashamed of your beliefs?

 

[ecco]

I used to believe evolution.

I seriously doubt that.

No one but God can help a person to know Him. That may seem like a contradiction, but I found it to be true.

Muslims are indoctrinated to believe their Allah is god.
Christians are indoctrinated to believe your God is god.
Hindus are indoctrinated to believe their Shiva is god.

Your specific Christian views were shaped by the people around you. Your beliefs have no more basis in reality than do the beliefs of Muslims or Hindus.

Your specific Christian views were shaped by the people around you. Your beliefs are rejected by most other Christians.

 

[ecco]

So you say. But you can't show where the bible acknowledges other real gods. Can you?

Real fallen angels are real gods. Ps 106:37-37
37 Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, 38 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan

There ya go again, tap dancing and ducking and dodging. Please show where the bible elevates devils and angels and idols to the same level as the true god comprising God the Father, Jesus, and The Holy Ghost.

This wooden figure is an idol

Are you really saying this wooden figurine is a Real God on the same level as the true god comprising God the Father, Jesus, and The Holy Ghost?

Are these angels capable of creating a universe? If not, then they are not Gods.

 

[ecco]

By HIM (Jesus) was all things created the bible says.

Yes He did. Jesus was that God who came down and assumed human form.

God was here before He came down as a child.

OK. But you said Jesus created all things. If that's what you believe...
Wouldn't it have been just as accurate to say God created all things?
Wouldn't it have been just as accurate to say The Holy Ghost created all things?
Wouldn't it have been more accurate to say the Trinity created all things?

Why did you just select Jesus?

You also need to explain how Jesus created all things since he (Jesus) did not exist at the time of creation.

 

[ecco]

Now if I have a science claim that says you did not, feel free to question the basis of it!

Here ya go. Off again into the land of nonsensical, meaningless sentences. If you think I can make sense of that, you are wrong.

 

[ecco]

Your question was this, if I recall...correct?

"
Are you somehow unaware of the advances in medical knowledge? Don't you know that today we can transplant hearts and kidneys?"

To which I replied this..

In Adam's day??!! Haha The actual knowledge in science today has zero to do with the origin fables associated with it.

The issue is you claiming actual science in a way that supposedly relates to the origin issues or creation. If you were not trying to do that, then you better get to it! Instead we see whining and moaning about hurt feelings and questions already dealt with.

I reposted your entire comment above to keep things in context.

But, let's focus in on just the following parts...

In Adam's day??!! Haha The actual knowledge in science today has zero to do with the origin fables associated with it.

Apparently you believe that that comment makes sense. It doesn't.

The issue is you claiming actual science in a way that supposedly relates to the origin issues or creation.

Apparently you believe that that comment makes sense. It doesn't.

Instead we see whining and moaning about hurt feelings and questions already dealt with.

Please show where I was "whining and moaning about hurt feelings". You can't because I wasn't.




So, let's recap...Two comments that make no sense and one comment that is untruthful.

I won't ask where you learned how to have a discussion. We all know the answer to that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Real fallen angels are real gods. Ps 106:37-37
37 Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, 38 And shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan

Dad, you need to prove that your book of myths is reliable. Otherwise you might as well be quoting from Harry Potter.

 

[paarsurrey]

No. And as I indicated you are merely reinterpreting you holy book so it is not too far off from reality. No one has yet to demonstrate "knowledge" from the Quran here. Only beliefs. I know that the Muslim beliefs about Adam and Eve have roots in Judaism. Are there any significant differences between the two? I know that one cannot justify a reinterpretation of Genesis to come to your conclusions, and I doubt if you can do the same with the Quran's version of Genesis.

EDIT: And why give the Quran any credibility in the first place? What makes the Quran reliable?

"to demonstrate "knowledge" "

What is one's source/s of "knowledge", please?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

There is no evidence of any process "set by god." The tale of Adam is just folklore, in fact, there's no real evidence that there was any Adam -- or any God, for that matter.
You've got the folklore right, but I think you've confused it with fact.
Science is reasonable because it involves reason, evidence and testing.The Quran is not based on evidence, and belief in its stories is not based on evidence, testing or reason. It's neither falsifiable nor predictive.

"no real evidence"

What is/are one's source/s of real evidence, please?

Regards

 

[dad]

There ya go again, tap dancing and ducking and dodging. Please show where the bible elevates devils and angels and idols to the same level as the true god comprising God the Father, Jesus, and The Holy Ghost.

This wooden figure is an idol

Are you really saying this wooden figurine is a Real God on the same level as the true god comprising God the Father, Jesus, and The Holy Ghost?

Are these angels capable of creating a universe? If not, then they are not Gods.

There are many spirits. Good and bad. Real spirits. When we say God's that indicates spirits. When we capitalize the word it refers to the one true God and creator. Just being a demon or Angel does not make one God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"to demonstrate "knowledge" "

What is one's source/s of "knowledge", please?

Regards

There are many sources of knowledge. Knowledge is confirmable by multiple sources. The Quran is not confirmable. All that one can do is to reintrepret it after the fact. For example when one makes a scientific discovery that discovery can be repeated by others. It does not rely on the work of one person.

Tell me, what make you think that the Quran is reliable? How would you test it? In other words, what reasonable test could show that it is wrong?

 

[Subduction Zone]

"no real evidence"

What is/are one's source/s of real evidence, please?

Regards

Scientific evidence is well defined and honest people will have to admit when evidence is given to them. Sadly there are many many dishonest people in this world when their religious beliefs get involved.

 

[dad]

OK. But you said Jesus created all things. If that's what you believe...
Wouldn't it have been just as accurate to say God created all things?

Sure. Tomato...Tomatoe.

Wouldn't it have been just as accurate to say The Holy Ghost created all things?
Wouldn't it have been more accurate to say the Trinity created all things?

sure..all the same.

You also need to explain how Jesus created all things since he (Jesus) did not exist at the time of creation.

of course He existed.

 

[dad]

I reposted your entire comment above to keep things in context.

But, let's focus in on just the following parts...


Apparently you believe that that comment makes sense. It doesn't.




Apparently you believe that that comment makes sense. It doesn't.



Please show where I was "whining and moaning about hurt feelings". You can't because I wasn't.




So, let's recap...Two comments that make no sense and one comment that is untruthful.

I won't ask where you learned how to have a discussion. We all know the answer to that.

Apparently you do not understand why knowledge about the current nature cannot apply to origins issues unless nature was the same.

 

[dad]

Here ya go. Off again into the land of nonsensical, meaningless sentences. If you think I can make sense of that, you are wrong.

Science has limits. Get it?

 

[dad]

Dad, you need to prove that your book of myths is reliable. Otherwise you might as well be quoting from Harry Potter.

Thanks for the offer of another cup of blah blah. No thanks.

 

[paarsurrey]

Scientific evidence is well defined and honest people will have to admit when evidence is given to them. Sadly there are many many dishonest people in this world when their religious beliefs get involved.

"Scientific evidence "

Does Science support "Atheism", please?
If yes, then please quote from a text book of Science or from a peer-reviewed article published in a reputed journal of Science where such positive proofs/evidences have been given that "G-d does not exist".

Regards

 

[Subduction Zone]

Science has limits. Get it?

We.know that. Sadly your knowledge is far more limited.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks for the offer of another cup of blah blah. No thanks.

That is because even you know that your beliefs are nonsensical. That is why you merely spam and run away.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"Scientific evidence "

Does Science support "Atheism", please?
If yes, then please quote from a text book of Science or from a peer-reviewed article published in a reputed journal of Science where such positive proofs/evidences have been given that "G-d does not exist".

Regards

Atheism needs no support. It is the null hypothesis of belief.

You have a distorted view of atheism. I am sure that you have been corrected on this. Why repeat a claim that you know to be false?