• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Creation and Evolution Compatible...Questions

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Is it a taunt or a challenge?
Funny how the science buffs here can't provide anything but ridicule. It's a sure sign that they have nothing to show for all the derision. No ammo huh? This is all you have?

Where is your evidence Fly? The fact that "speciation" is the only thing anyone has provided to substantiate a "belief" that goes way beyond adaptation, is evidence in itself apparently.

There is no substantive evidence for what you "believe". If there was you would have provided it by now just to shut me up. o_O

Here's the challenge again......provide "substantive evidence" that single celled organisms (we don't even have to mention abiogenesis) morphed themselves into all the various life forms that we see on earth, both past and present.

Show us how microscopic life transformed itself by accidental mutations into creatures the size of buildings......? You all believe it, so show us how it happened and what real evidence you base it on.

If there are "mountains" of this "evidence" and claims of it being "overwhelming"......let's see it. But there can't be a reliance on "belief" or "faith" and no "suggestion", "assumption", or "conjecture". Show us that you don't have a belief system, just like we do.....:)

How hard can it be?
So I point out your tactic of using goading and taunting to get people to interact with you and you respond by goading and taunting?

Hilarious.

But if you truly want to discuss evolutionary biology with me, then please pick up where we left off. Specifically....

CLICK HERE

CLICK HERE

CLICK HERE
 
Last edited:

Olinda

Member
Yes I can see that many scientists seem to be very affected by the results of tests that for macro-evolution don't really amount to a hill of beans.
There are lots of people attacking me, but not addressing the topic.
I note that you are not supporting your claim that I raised a strawman...thanks.

Have you got some evidence to share or are you just another evolutionist who likes to stir the pot? There are enough of them already. :rolleyes:
I don't identify as an evolutionist. Scientific theories are not matters for belief.

Now as to evidence, I'll try if you help me understand what you are after. Let's go back to an earlier post of yours where you said
It is in the genetic code that you think nobody wrote.
Since you offered this as evidence of ID, I'm assuming that you accept it as fact. So what is your "substantive evidence" for DNA and the genetic code? Have you seen it?

Yes, I have been told about the writing style all right, but it hasn't stopped this theory being taught as proven fact in schools and universities, has it?
There go the goalposts again. :) For the rest of the paragraph, the use of 'theory' in science and common langues has already been discussed.
People use the methodology that they were taught to use...and these people "verify each other's results"......but only within the framework of what they already believe. "The outcome is support for a theory, or a new or modified theory" but no one questions the validity of the basic premise which is not provable. It's like building an elaborate mansion on matchsticks IMO.
What 'basic premise' do you refer to? If you mean the ToE, it isn't provable, like every other scientific theory. Of course it is questionable. Do you have any evidence that would be in opposition? And I don't mean non-evidence like pretty pics and incredulity.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
So I point out your tactic of using goading and taunting to get people to interact with you and you respond by goading and taunting?

Hilarious.

But if you truly want to discuss evolutionary biology with me, then please pick up where we left off. Specifically....

CLICK HERE

CLICK HERE

CLICK HERE

Thank you for providing the links...they open up much more material for this thread, so I encourage readers to check out more than just your replies to me.

I find what science suggests to be "hilarious".

Here's an example of me exploring the "fundamental psychological issue behind all this".....just in case you give the impression that I ignore what science is saying. o_O

What's the difference between "evolution" and "adaptation"?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Thank you for providing the links...they open up much more material for this thread, so I encourage readers to check out more than just your replies to me.

I find what science suggests to be "hilarious".

Here's an example of me exploring the "fundamental psychological issue behind all this".....just in case you give the impression that I ignore what science is saying. o_O

What's the difference between "evolution" and "adaptation"?
Adaptation, as you seem to be using the term is merely evolution on a very small scale. There is no real difference.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
And that is your mature response?
sign0182.gif
I'm surrounded by atheists who can post infantile stuff but nothing to back up their theory.

....they really must be out of ammo if this is the best they can do....?
indifferent0028.gif
... Says the person who peppers their comments with patronizing derision and emojis?
 

Jose Fly

Fisker of men
Thank you for providing the links...they open up much more material for this thread, so I encourage readers to check out more than just your replies to me.

I find what science suggests to be "hilarious".

Here's an example of me exploring the "fundamental psychological issue behind all this".....just in case you give the impression that I ignore what science is saying. o_O

What's the difference between "evolution" and "adaptation"?
So despite all your taunts, all your goading, all your trash-talking about people failing to show you any evidence.......when given the chance to discuss actual evidence, you once again run away.

Speaks for itself.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Then do yourself a favor and don't read it. :)



I just love the way you create your strawmen and then ever so politely tear them down.... who is attacking those scientists? I am questioning their methods...passed on to those who continue to believe what they are never taught to question.

Belief in "the scientific method" for everything is what the problem is. Question the method and then question the result. Read the literature and see how much guesswork is involved in their conclusions....how very scientific!
indifferent0025.gif




Really? Who said that the "scientific method" (I know people like the sound of that term) was accurate in everything it tests?
Who put science on that really high pedestal? Other scientists....:rolleyes:

business-commerce-pedestal-authority_figure-authority-boss-status-cman739_low.jpg
Oh please. YOU are attacking scientists as conspiratorial, dishonest con men. Over and over you do this. Despite the fact that you don't seem to understand the scientific method at all. There's no sense in playing coy now. We've all read your posts.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
I have plenty of evidence for a very "natural" cause of things that show evidence of being purposefully designed. Logic tells me that things that demonstrate purpose have been planned. Evolution plans nothing....it is supposedly undirected.



Oh please. False gods don't survive real science......I think we all know that thunder doesn't come from Thor, nor does Poseidon cause tsunamis. Last time I looked, neither of these gods was claimed to be a Creator.

Since science cannot substantiate its claim for a "natural" cause of life, true science cannot dismiss an Intelligent Designer as that first cause.

I don't see science being any more advanced on the question of abiogenesis in the last 50 years....do you?
No you don't. What you have is one big argument from personal incredulity. Which despite what you try to say here, is not a logical argument.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Oh, I will if you will....
indifferent0005.gif




It is none of my business what Francis Collins wants to believe....that is between him and his Maker.
His training (indoctrination) as an atheistic scientist programmed his mindset. So when he had his "experience with a waterfall"
rolleye0012.gif
he had a conflict of belief which he had to integrate......no doubt about how he did that.

Nonsense. He wouldn't have had any religious experience on his hike if he was "indoctrinated as an atheistic scientist programmed his mindset." Your assertion doesn't make any sense.

You keep saying that "evolutionists" have to be atheistic. I've just given you a very good example of an "evolutionist" who identifies as a born-again Christian, thus negating your assertion.

DNA is the fundamental code of life that was written by the hand of an intelligent and masterful Creator using the same raw materials for all his living creatures. What code used by man never has an intelligent author? Similarity is inevitable when the same raw materials are used for all. Artists do this all the time.....it is often their signature. The same basic frameworks are used for a wide variety of 'constructions'.....which translates to amazing variety. "Variety is spice of life"....and we love it.
There is no evidence that is the case at all. Feel free to present yours. And once again, pretty pictures of things you like in nature don't make your argument for you. You expect a lot more from scientists than that, don't you? Then we should expect more from you.

The Creator does not tell us the details of his methods or how long it took him to fashion his endless variety of living things, which he integrated into an environment also specifically created to support all this life in a self sustaining way......He is a genius who deserves full credit for what he created....not some second hand credit down on a list that scientists, who claim to be believers, have made up.
Atheists don't have him on any list.
indifferent0009.gif
Ah, so this Creator didn't bother providing us peons with the details, and yet you seem to be able to tell everybody how this Creator operates and what it's thinking, it's likes and dislikes, etc. Funny how that works.

Demonstrate the existence of this Creator and I'll have to believe it exists. But not until then.

It's funny to see you now using the No True Scotsman Fallacy, now that you've been informed about Francis Collins. How convenient that he's not a real Christian in your view, eh Deeje?
You really are full of logical fallacies. It's no wonder your arguments don't hold any water.

It is the height of hypocrisy to claim to worship the "Creator of heaven and earth" and then to denigrate him to some second rate position as if science must be served first....Hypocrites have no part with this Creator, so that is why we must choose our position. Those not on God's side 100% will not share in what he has planned for the future of this planet and its inhabitants. All they have done is place a foot in both camps to maintain their credibility in the world of science, whilst wearing a thin veneer of their so called faith. Calling yourself a Christian and then denying the Creator will not result in a good outcome, IMO. Time will tell I guess....
happy0062.gif

Actually, many Christians I've spoken with over the years tell me that evolution is part of the design created by the God they worship. They tell me that their God obviously designed something so brilliant. They seem to think God is more intelligent than you want to give "him" credit for. They certainly don't deny any creator. They credit "him" with enough intelligence to come up with evolution. But again, I'm sure you'd say they aren't true Christians.

Many Christians disagree with you. When you can sort out among yourselves who is following the real religion, and demonstrate the veracity of any of your claims, be sure to let the rest of us know. Until then, I find no good reason to believe any of you.

As to the rest of it, you have no idea what God thinks or wants from anybody, assuming there is one in the first place. You can't even demonstrate a God's existence in the first place, let alone what "he" thinks or feels about anything. Funny how "he" always seems to agree with the personal opinions of the person asserting "his" existence though, isn't it? ;)
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
If you can get your timing wrong that many times....

What? Twice? Lol. [And on one date (1914), the evidence proves the prophecies in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, were and are still being fulfilled!]

Evidence supporting 1914 as the "Last Days":

“Half a century has gone by, yet the mark that the tragedy of the Great War left on the body and soul of the nations has not faded . . . The physical and moral magnitude of this ordeal was such that nothing left was the same as before. Society in its entirety: systems of government, national borders, laws, armed forces, interstate relations, but also ideologies, family life, fortunes, positions, personal relations—everything was changed from top to bottom. . . . Humanity finally lost its balance, never to recover it to this day.” ( Charles de Gaulle, Le Monde, Nov. 12, 1968, p. 9)


“Everyone agrees in recognizing that in the whole history of mankind, few dates have had the importance of August 2, 1914.” (Maurice Genevoix, Promise of Greatness)

“Those who lived through the war could never rid themselves of the belief that one world had ended and another begun in August 1914.” (The Generation of 1914, Robert Wohl, Professor of History)


“The whole world really blew up about World War I and we still don’t know why. Before then, men thought that utopia was in sight. There was peace and prosperity. Then everything blew up. We’ve been in a state of suspended animation ever since . . . More people have been killed in this century than in all of history.” (Dr. Walker Percy, American Medical News, November 21, 1977)


“Everything would get better and better. This was the world I was born in. . . . Suddenly, unexpectedly, one morning in 1914 the whole thing came to an end.” (British statesman Harold Macmillan, The New York Times, November 23, 1980)

“The last completely ‘normal’ year in history was 1913, the year before World War I began.” (Times-Herald, Washington, D.C., March 13, 1949)


“In 1914 the world lost a coherence which it has not managed to recapture since. . . . This has been a time of extraordinary disorder and violence, both across national frontiers and within them.” (The Economist)


“The Great War of 1914-18 lies like a band of scorched earth dividing that time from ours. In wiping out so many lives which would have been operative on the years that followed, in destroying beliefs, changing ideas, and leaving incurable wounds of disillusion, it created a physical as well as psychological gulf between two epochs.” (Foreword to The Proud Tower, by Barbara W. Tuchman)


“Ever since 1914, everybody conscious of trends in the world has been deeply troubled by what has seemed like a fated and predetermined march toward ever greater disaster. Many serious people have come to feel that nothing can be done to avert the plunge towards ruin.” (Bertrand Russell, The New York Times Magazine, September 27, 1953)


“Neither the old nor the young had any suspicion that what they were witnessing, during that incomparable season of 1914, was, in fact, the end of an era.” (Before the Lamps Went Out, by Geoffrey Marcus)


“[There was] little or no evidence of a steady rise or a ‘snowballing’ of conflicts and tensions leading directly to the outbreak of war.” On the contrary, “by late 1913 and early 1914 . . . relations among the major powers appeared to be more settled than they had been for many years.” (International Crisis, by Eugenia Nomikos and Robert C. North, 1976)


“The effects of World War I were literally revolutionary and struck deep in the lives of almost all peoples, economically as well as socially and politically.” (Meyers Enzyklopädisches Lexikon)


“The year 1913 marked the close of an era.” (1913 - An End and a Beginning, Virginia Cowles)


“Before 1914 the monetary and the financial systems were compatible. . . . If one takes August 1914 as marking the dividing line between them, the contrasts between the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries are striking. In many aspects of human affairs there has been a complete reversal of trend. . . . One major reason was the severance of the linkage between the financial system and money with intrinsic value that began in 1914. . . . The breaking of the linkage was a momentous event. . . . 1914 marked a radical, and in the end catastrophic, transformation of that system.” (Ashby Bladen, senior vice president The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America)


but if you're like some, you will ignore it too....AS PROPHESIED!!
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Which Resurrection? The one that has been predicted to occur "soon" by hundreds of religious leaders across the ages, including at least three such predictions by JW leaders.
I guess you'll just have to wait and see, eh? I think you will observe, firsthand, Jehovah God's and Jesus' tender affections. Hope I'm there to welcome you back.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
(resurrections predicted)....including at least three such predictions by JW leaders.

"At least three"??

Source, please.

[I know of one Resurrection predicted 90 years ago; another date was a "wait and see"...no prophecy.]
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Which Resurrection? The one that has been predicted to occur "soon" by hundreds of religious leaders across the ages, including at least three such predictions by JW leaders.
I guess we'll have to wait and see. :) Won't it be fun? :D
You don't know the answer to a simple question, so you try to make a joke.
Did that work for you during your home schooling days? Did being the class clown get you straight A's?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
I don't see science being any more advanced on the question of abiogenesis in the last 50 years....do you?
Yes, I do.

A. You don't because you haven't taken the time to do even a most rudimentary search.
B. You don't because you don't want to see any advances.
C. Both of the above.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
"At least three"??

Source, please.

[I know of one Resurrection predicted 90 years ago; another date was a "wait and see"...no prophecy.]

Watch Tower Society unfulfilled predictions - Wikipedia
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia
Did the Watchtower Society Predict 2000 for Armageddon? | Watchman Fellowship, Inc.
Prophecy Blunders! 100 Years of Failed Watchtower prophecies
1993 (The society's latest 'History' book - "Jehovah's Witnesses, Proclaimers of God's Kingdom", 1993) [Note: At the end of this book there is a chronological section called 'Notable Dates'. The predictions for 1925 and 1975 don't even get a mention! Talk about rewriting history to gullible young converts!]​
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Watch Tower Society unfulfilled predictions - Wikipedia
Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia
Did the Watchtower Society Predict 2000 for Armageddon? | Watchman Fellowship, Inc.
Prophecy Blunders! 100 Years of Failed Watchtower prophecies
1993 (The society's latest 'History' book - "Jehovah's Witnesses, Proclaimers of God's Kingdom", 1993) [Note: At the end of this book there is a chronological section called 'Notable Dates'. The predictions for 1925 and 1975 don't even get a mention! Talk about rewriting history to gullible young converts!]​
You specifically said, ‘resurrections’, don’t you remember? I answered accordingly..

I said in post#1192, “I know of one Resurrection predicted 90 years ago”, that was 1925....regarding the other hoped-for date, the congregations were told to take a “wait and see” approach.

And 1975 was a “wait and see” situation also...there was no ‘prediction’...nothing definite was ever stated. That makes the authors of your quoted link, liars. (As if the internet doesn’t have enough.)

(BTW, 1975 had nothing to do with a resurrection!)

If you post a reliable, objective source, I’ll read it.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You specifically said, ‘resurrections’, don’t you remember? I answered accordingly..

I said in post#1192, “I know of one Resurrection predicted 90 years ago”, that was 1925....regarding the other hoped-for date, the congregations were told to take a “wait and see” approach.

And 1975 was a “wait and see” situation also...there was no ‘prediction’...nothing definite was ever stated. That makes the authors of your quoted link, liars. (As if the internet doesn’t have enough.)

(BTW, 1975 had nothing to do with a resurrection!)

If you post a reliable, objective source, I’ll read it.
You won't trust a reliable objective source. The leaders of your cult have lied to you and you bought the lies. They tried to change what their predictions were after they failed so badly.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
You specifically said, ‘resurrections’, don’t you remember? I answered accordingly..

I said in post#1192, “I know of one Resurrection predicted 90 years ago”, that was 1925....regarding the other hoped-for date, the congregations were told to take a “wait and see” approach.

And 1975 was a “wait and see” situation also...there was no ‘prediction’...nothing definite was ever stated. That makes the authors of your quoted link, liars. (As if the internet doesn’t have enough.)

(BTW, 1975 had nothing to do with a resurrection!)

If you post a reliable, objective source, I’ll read it.
Well, I guess you got me there. I'll admit I don't clearly understand the terms Armageddon and Resurrection. That's no excuse. I don't excuse Creos for not being able understand the terms abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution (or even the term Theory).

So, how to describe the many failed predictions made by church leaders regarding the 'End of Times'? Predictions that impacted the lives of followers.

Maybe just some quotes from JW will suffice.

1877 'The End Of This World; that is the end of the gospel and the beginning of the millennial age is nearer than most men suppose; indeed we have already entered the transition period, which is to be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation Dan. 12:3." (N.H. Barbour and C.T. Russell, Three Worlds, and the Harvest of This World, p. 17).

1880 "We need not here repeat the evidences that the "seventh trump" began its sounding A.D., 1840, and will continue until the end of the time of trouble, and the end of "The times of the Gentiles," A.D., 1914,(Zion's Watchtower November, 1880 p. 1)

1888 "In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that the date will be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men.

1902 "In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of A.D. 1914." (The Time Is At Hand, 1902 edition, p. 99)

1920 .. of necessity would end in the fall of 1925 ... (Millions now living will never die, 1920 p 89-90)

1922 "The period must end in 1925. (Golden Age, Jan. 4, 1922, p. 217)

1923 "Our thought is, that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures. (Watchtower, p. 106, March 1, 1923)
Ooops

1938 "...mark the words of Jesus, which definitely seem to discourage the bearing of children immediately before or during Armageddon....It would therefore appear that there is no reasonable or scriptural injunction to bring children into the world immediately before Armageddon, where we now are." (Watchtower, Nov. 1, 1938, p. 324)

1974 "Yes, the end of this system is so very near! Is that not reason to increase our activity?...Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world's end." (Kingdom Ministry, May 1974, p. 3)

1995 "Why Awake is Published" [before Nov 8th 1995] Most important, this magazine builds confidence in the Creator's promise of a peaceful and secure new world before the generation that saw the events of 1914 passes away."​

There ain't too many people alive today who are over 118.

I'm tired of cutting and pasting from Prophecy Blunders! 100 Years of Failed Watchtower prophecies

I'm sure you know all about this site and the other sites I linked.
I'm also sure that you somehow rationalize all the failed predictions.
I'm sure you are OK with people selling their belongings in order to have money to spread the gospel in their few remaining years..
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
No you don't. What you have is one big argument from personal incredulity. Which despite what you try to say here, is not a logical argument.

IMO your own assertions are not logical. Can you show me how these....

images
images
images


Came from these.....?

images


Please give us a detailed description of how science "knows" that this isn't a bigger fairy story than what you think we believe....?
confused0060.gif


Nonsense. He wouldn't have had any religious experience on his hike if he was "indoctrinated as an atheistic scientist programmed his mindset." Your assertion doesn't make any sense.

Actually, I'm telling you that his interpretation is a response to two conflicting ideas that he reconciled in his own mind in order to retain and accommodate both. Why is that so hard to understand?

You keep saying that "evolutionists" have to be atheistic. I've just given you a very good example of an "evolutionist" who identifies as a born-again Christian, thus negating your assertion.

I am well aware of those who want to have a foot in both camps. IMO it betrays a complete lack of faith in God and an attempt to gain credibility with both camps without having to declare a position one way or the other. It is a wimp's position IMO.

Demonstrate the existence of this Creator and I'll have to believe it exists. But not until then.

Except, by the time the demonstration happens.....it might be a bit late.
sad0066.gif
I have tried to warn you.

It's funny to see you now using the No True Scotsman Fallacy, now that you've been informed about Francis Collins. How convenient that he's not a real Christian in your view, eh Deeje?
You really are full of logical fallacies. It's no wonder your arguments don't hold any water.

I think my arguments hold water just fine, judging by the amount of traffic on these threads. The "no true Scotsman" argument also holds water because the criteria for a Christian I imagine is much the same as the criteria for a scientist. Just calling yourself one, doesn't make you one, now does it?
rolleye0012.gif


Many Christians disagree with you. When you can sort out among yourselves who is following the real religion, and demonstrate the veracity of any of your claims, be sure to let the rest of us know. Until then, I find no good reason to believe any of you.

"Many Christians" are going to be awfully disappointed when the judge asks them how faithfully they defended the Creator when those who wanted him dead filled their heads with all manner of ridiculous nonsense. I'll let Jesus sort that one out...in the meantime whilst you wait, you can work on providing more than empty comments on these threads....that would be nice.

As to the rest of it, you have no idea what God thinks or wants from anybody, assuming there is one in the first place.

You're wrong about that because he left an instruction manual.....we all know how some people think they don't need one and then wonder why nothing fits.
indifferent0025.gif


You can't even demonstrate a God's existence in the first place, let alone what "he" thinks or feels about anything.

You can't disprove his existence either. The Bible is ancient, but it tells us about things that are happening in the world right now. It is not just a book about time periods but about human nature and you know what? It never goes out of date. Human beings don't change, which is why their behavior is so predictable.

With all the comments on these threads, where is the evidence that evolution, on the scale of amoebas to dinosaurs, ever happened except in the imagination of those who want to take science fact into the realms of science fiction?

Funny how "he" always seems to agree with the personal opinions of the person asserting "his" existence though, isn't it? ;)

I think that would be logical, don't you? We agree with God and he agrees with us.....if you don't agree with either of us, then that is entirely up to you.
 
Last edited:
Top