• 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!

Why the theory of evolution is so important

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
metis said:
Even within Catholic theological circles, the issue of original sin is controversial. Personally, I don't accept it as taught, which is my right as a Catholic.

Nor do I believe in the literalness of Adam & Eve and feel that the narrative is more allegorical, and the Church very much accepts that as being a possibly valid interpretation.

Since the 1950's especially, the Church has increasingly been more accepting of the ToE as long as it's understood that God was behind it all However, on some other matters, such as o.s., the Church has not moved away from its traditional teaching on that based on what's found in the gospels, especially Paul's teachings on that.

Being raised in the Roman Church and studying the changes in the Roman Church over the years I cannot accept your explanation of the view of the Roman Church on the 'Fall' and 'Original Sin,' but of course we will likely continue to disagree. You may advocate a a more personal interpretation, but I do not believe this in reality is accepted by the Roman Church. The Roman Church does allow and supports a Theistic Evolution perspective, which includes Adam and Eve, and a non-literal(?) interpretation. The concept of the 'Fall' and Original Sin' remain at foundation of Roman Church beliefs It would help if you could provide a reference supporting your personal view, According to the Vatican II and the standardized Catechism worldwide your view definitely does not reflect the teachings of the Roman Church.

The view of an allegorical teaching of the Adam and Eve does run into problems with the New Testament, because the Roman Church does state that the New Testament is predominately original authored, literal in intent and inspired by God. The New Testament supports a literal Genesis and the Noah flood. The willingness of the Roman Church to accept a literal interpretation of Genesis is definitely a paradox in the modern world, and contributes to the chasm between religion and science.

The authors, by content of the NT, and/or the Church Fathers believed in a literal Genesis, even though some offered both a literal and allegorical together.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: New Testament

The New Testament was not written all at once. The books that compose it appeared one after another in the space of fifty years, i.e. in the second half of the first century. Written in different and distant countries and addressed to particular Churches, they took some time to spread throughout the whole of Christendom, and a much longer time to become accepted. The unification of the canon was not accomplished without much controversy (see CANON OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES). Still it can be said that from the third century, or perhaps earlier, the existence of all the books that today form our New Testament was everywhere known, although they were not all universally admitted, at least as certainly canonical. However, uniformity existed in the West from the fourth century. The East had to await the seventh century to see an end to all doubts on the subject. In early times the questions of canonicity and authenticity were not discussed separately and independently of each other, the latter being readily brought forward as a reason for the former; but in the fourth century, the canonicity was held, especially by St. Jerome, on account of ecclesiastical prescription and, by the fact, the authenticity of the contested books became of minor importance. We have to come down to the sixteenth century to hear the question repeated, whether the Epistle to the Hebrews was written by St. Paul, or the Epistles called Catholic were in reality composed by the Apostles whose names they bear. Some Humanists, as Erasmus and Cardinal Cajetan, revived the objections mentioned by St. Jerome, and which are based on the style of these writings. To this Luther added the inadmissibility of the doctrine, as regards the Epistle of St. James. However, it was practically the Lutherans alone who sought to diminish the traditional Canon, which the Council of Trent was to define in 1546.

It was reserved to modern times, especially to our own days, to dispute and deny the truth of the opinion received from the ancients concerning the origin of the books of the New Testament. This doubt and the negation regarding the authors had their primary cause in the religious incredulity of the eighteenth century. These witnesses to the truth of a religion no longer believed were inconvenient, if it was true that they had seen and heard what they related. Little time was needed to find, in analyzing them, indications of a later origin. The conclusions of the Tübingen school, which brought down to the second century, the compositions of all the New Testament except four Epistles of St. Paul (Rom.; Gal.; I, II Cor.), was very common thirty or forty years ago, in so-called critical circles (see Dict. apolog. de la foi catholique, I, 771-6). When the crisis of militant incredulity had passed, the problem of the New Testament began to be examined more calmly, and especially more methodically. From the critical studies of the past half century we may draw the following conclusion, which is now in its general outlines admitted by all: It was a mistake to have attributed the origin of Christian literature to a later date; these texts, on the whole, date back to the second half of the first century; consequently they are the work of a generation that counted a good number of direct witnesses of the life of Jesus Christ. From stage to stage, from Strauss to Renan, from Renan to Reuss, Weizsäcker, Holtzmann, Jülicher, Weiss, and from these to Zahn, Harnack, criticism has just retraced its steps over the distance it had so inconsiderately covered under the guidance of Christian Baur. Today it is admitted that the first Gospels were written about the year 70. The Acts can hardly be said to be later; Harnack even thinks they were composed nearer to the year 60 than to the year 70. The Epistles of St. Paul remain beyond all dispute, except those to the Ephesians and to the Hebrews, and the pastoral Epistles, about which doubts still exist. In like manner there are many who contest the Catholic Epistles; but even if the Second Epistle of Peter is delayed till towards the year 120 or 130, the Epistle of St. James is put by several at the very beginning of Christian literature, between the years 40 and 50, the earliest Epistles of St. Paul about 52 till 58.
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Dear Evols,

Inside your own unbelieving body. You have the DNA of Mt. Eve...AND...the human intelligence of Adam. You, as a Species, inherited your DNA long BEFORE you evolved into a human being. Mt. Eve was NOT human. She did NOT descend from Adam. Did she?

You inherited Adam's superior intelligence from Adam, in the SAME way you got your DNA from Mt. Eve. The foolish Theory of Evolution wants you to believe the Fairy Tale that mindless Nature and long periods of time and uncounted mutations changed you into a Human. What Tripe. What foolishness.

The evidence that you descended from Adam, the first human, is overwhelming since NO Ape and NO other creature on the face of this Earth is able to carry on a conversion with either one of us, and NONE of them posts. That is because mindless Nature does NOT create Human intelligence in Apes, as some mindless Evols insist. You get it from your parents, and NO Ape has EVER evolved into a human. That's God's Truth.

BTW, God's Truth is the ONE Truth. God's Truth MUST agree in every way with every discovery of science and history, or it is NOT God's Truth. God's Truth exposes the biggest False assumption, in Science today, and that is the False Theory of Evolution. Evolution does not agree with scripture NOR history. That's because evolution is a Lie. What is referred to as MicroEvolution is nothing but Adaptation within kinds. Today's Science just doesn't know the difference in His kinds.
There is no objective verifiable evidence to support your mythical assertions based on an archaic religious agenda.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Even within Catholic theological circles, the issue of original sin is controversial. Personally, I don't accept it as taught, which is my right as a Catholic.

Nor do I believe in the literalness of Adam & Eve and feel that the narrative is more allegorical, and the Church very much accepts that as being a possibly valid interpretation.

Since the 1950's especially, the Church has increasingly been more accepting of the ToE as long as it's understood that God was behind it all However, on some other matters, such as o.s., the Church has not moved away from its traditional teaching on that based on what's found in the gospels, especially Paul's teachings on that.

From the Catechism: PART ONE - THE PROFESSION OF FAITH
SECTION ONE - "I BELIEVE" - "WE BELIEVE"
CHAPTER TWO - GOD COMES TO MEET MAN

ARTICLE 3
SACRED SCRIPTURE


IV. THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE

120 It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.90 This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.91

The Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah and Malachi.

The New Testament: the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Acts of the Apostles, the Letters of St. Paul to the Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letters of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2 and 3 John, and Jude, and Revelation (the Apocalypse).

The Old Testament

121 The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value,92 for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.

122 Indeed, "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,"94 the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way."95

123 Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. The Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism).

The New Testament

124 "The Word of God, which is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, is set forth and displays its power in a most wonderful way in the writings of the New Testament"96 which hand on the ultimate truth of God's Revelation. Their central object is Jesus Christ, God's incarnate Son: his acts, teachings, Passion and glorification, and his Church's beginnings under the Spirit's guidance.97

125 The Gospels are the heart of all the Scriptures "because they are our principal source for the life and teaching of the Incarnate Word, our Savior".98

126 We can distinguish three stages in the formation of the Gospels:

1. The life and teaching of Jesus. The Church holds firmly that the four Gospels, "whose historicity she unhesitatingly affirms, faithfully hand on what Jesus, the Son of God, while he lived among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation, until the day when he was taken up."99

2. The oral tradition. "For, after the ascension of the Lord, the apostles handed on to their hearers what he had said and done, but with that fuller understanding which they, instructed by the glorious events of Christ and enlightened by the Spirit of truth, now enjoyed."100

3. The written Gospels. "The sacred authors, in writing the four Gospels, selected certain of the many elements which had been handed on, either orally or already in written form; others they synthesized or explained with an eye to the situation of the churches, the while sustaining the form of preaching, but always in such a fashion that they have told us the honest truth about Jesus."101

127 The fourfold Gospel holds a unique place in the Church, as is evident both in the veneration which the liturgy accords it and in the surpassing attraction it has exercised on the saints at all times:
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Inside your own unbelieving body.
According to a survey I saw a couple of decades ago, most Christian theologians, and also most Christian denominations, do accept the ToE as long as it is understood God was behind it all. There is literally nothing in the ToE that counters Divine creation.

The evidence that you descended from Adam, the first human, is overwhelming
Please provide such "evidence". Were you there when Adam was supposedly around?

and NO Ape has EVER evolved into a human.
Well, apes and humans do have their own evolutionary histories, but the evidence does point to the likelihood of a common ancestor that likely predates 6 million years b.p..

Evolution does not agree with scripture NOR history.
Actually the creation accounts do show an evolution of God's creation, plus both the Jewish and Christian scriptures do show the evolution of God's actions dealing with both Earth and us humans. IOW, not everything we read about in the scriptures happened all at once.

That's because evolution is a Lie. What is referred to as MicroEvolution is nothing but Adaptation within kinds.
Different species are genetically different "kinds", and we well know that "speciation" has occurred because it's been observed many times over, including at the university I attended for my grad work in anthropology.

Maybe look up "speciation" in Wikipedia and check out its links to scientific studies.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The Baha'i Faith scripture is not scientific on evolution. The Harmony of science and religion is a foundation principle of Baha'i understanding of science. In that concerning the physical nature of our universe the interpretation and understanding of scripture including Baha'i scripture must be by the light of the evolving nature of science. The Baha'i scripture does states that humans changed form (evolved) but the intent of God was always to be human, and rejects the materialist view of strictly a natural evolution without intent, Scientific evolution is a physical description from the human perspective. The application of Baha'i scripture is more a spiritual evolution.

Science and Religion | What Bahá’ís Believe
An Ever-Advancing Civilization
Science and Religion
Bahá’ís reject the notion that there is an inherent conflict between science and religion, a notion that became prevalent in intellectual discourse at a time when the very conception of each system of knowledge was far from adequate. The harmony of science and religion is one of the fundamental principles of the Bahá’í Faith, which teaches that religion, without science, soon degenerates into superstition and fanaticism, while science without religion becomes merely the instrument of crude materialism. “Religion,” according to the Bahá’í writings, “is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore, it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive.”1Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created things embody the potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual investigation and scientific acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and organisms are deprived of this potentiality and attainment.2

So far as earthly existence is concerned, many of the greatest achievements of religion have been moral in character. Through its teachings and through the examples of human lives illumined by these teachings, masses of people in all ages and lands have developed the capacity to love, to give generously, to serve others, to forgive, to trust in God, and to sacrifice for the common good. Social structures and institutional systems have been devised that translate these moral advances into the norms of social life on a vast scale. In the final analysis, the spiritual impulses set in motion by the Founders of the world’s religions—the Manifestations of God—have been the chief influence in the civilizing of human character.

‘Abdu’l-Bahá has described science as the “most noble” of all human virtues and “the discoverer of all things”.3 Science has enabled society to separate fact from conjecture. Further, scientific capabilities—of observing, of measuring, of rigorously testing ideas—have allowed humanity to construct a coherent understanding of the laws and processes governing physical reality, as well as to gain insights into human conduct and the life of society.

Taken together, science and religion provide the fundamental organizing principles by which individuals, communities, and institutions function and evolve. When the material and spiritual dimensions of the life of a community are kept in mind and due attention is given to both scientific and spiritual knowledge, the tendency to reduce human progress to the consumption of goods, services and technological packages is avoided. Scientific knowledge, to take but one simple example, helps the members of a community to analyse the physical and social implications of a given technological proposal—say, its environmental impact—and spiritual insight gives rise to moral imperatives that uphold social harmony and that ensure technology serves the common good. Together, these two sources of knowledge are essential to the liberation of individuals and communities from the traps of ignorance and passivity. They are vital to the advancement of civilization.

Rest of the response in next post.
Actually, in many respects both the Baha'i and Catholic approach are really not that terribly far apart. Both appear to have been strongly affected by the use of "reason" by Aristotle and Plato within our respective faiths.

Anyhow, thanks for the above info.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
From the Catechism: PART ONE - THE PROFESSION OF FAITH
SECTION ONE - "I BELIEVE" - "WE BELIEVE"
CHAPTER TWO - GOD COMES TO MEET MAN

ARTICLE 3
SACRED SCRIPTURE


IV. THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE

120 It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.90 This complete list is called the canon of Scripture. It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.91

The Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah and Malachi.

The New Testament: the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the Acts of the Apostles, the Letters of St. Paul to the Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letters of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2 and 3 John, and Jude, and Revelation (the Apocalypse).

The Old Testament

121 The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value,92 for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.

122 Indeed, "the economy of the Old Testament was deliberately so oriented that it should prepare for and declare in prophecy the coming of Christ, redeemer of all men."93 "Even though they contain matters imperfect and provisional,"94 the books of the Old Testament bear witness to the whole divine pedagogy of God's saving love: these writings "are a storehouse of sublime teaching on God and of sound wisdom on human life, as well as a wonderful treasury of prayers; in them, too, the mystery of our salvation is present in a hidden way."95

123 Christians venerate the Old Testament as true Word of God. The Church has always vigorously opposed the idea of rejecting the Old Testament under the pretext that the New has rendered it void (Marcionism).

The New Testament

124 "The Word of God, which is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, is set forth and displays its power in a most wonderful way in the writings of the New Testament"96 which hand on the ultimate truth of God's Revelation. Their central object is Jesus Christ, God's incarnate Son: his acts, teachings, Passion and glorification, and his Church's beginnings under the Spirit's guidance.97

125 The Gospels are the heart of all the Scriptures "because they are our principal source for the life and teaching of the Incarnate Word, our Savior".98

126 We can distinguish three stages in the formation of the Gospels:

1. The life and teaching of Jesus. The Church holds firmly that the four Gospels, "whose historicity she unhesitatingly affirms, faithfully hand on what Jesus, the Son of God, while he lived among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation, until the day when he was taken up."99

2. The oral tradition. "For, after the ascension of the Lord, the apostles handed on to their hearers what he had said and done, but with that fuller understanding which they, instructed by the glorious events of Christ and enlightened by the Spirit of truth, now enjoyed."100

3. The written Gospels. "The sacred authors, in writing the four Gospels, selected certain of the many elements which had been handed on, either orally or already in written form; others they synthesized or explained with an eye to the situation of the churches, the while sustaining the form of preaching, but always in such a fashion that they have told us the honest truth about Jesus."101

127 The fourfold Gospel holds a unique place in the Church, as is evident both in the veneration which the liturgy accords it and in the surpassing attraction it has exercised on the saints at all times:
I quite aware of this since I taught it for 14 years prior to converting to Judaism. But let me point out something that might help in understanding the Catholic approach on this, especially since Vatican II.

A good way to picture the Church, it's teachings, and how we may respond to both is to compare the Church to a Roman traffic officer trying to get traffic to move in an orderly and safe manner (if you've ever been to Rome, you'll know that this is quite a daunting task), whereas some drivers obey the officer, some ignore the officer, and some only partially pay attention to the officer. But if something goes wrong, or there's a conflict that ensues, the officer is at least there to try and help sort things out.

The Church is that "officer", and the people responding or not responding to the officer is us as Catholics. IOW, the Church has a role and obligation to teach what it thinks is mostly right, but we have the right of discernment in terms of what we may personally believe in. However, when I slip into my teaching mode at church, I do have to teach the "company line". This conflict of sorts actually happened yesterday at a seminar I'm involved with whereas I had an opinion on a matter that deviates from the Church's teaching, thus I mentioned to the group that I couldn't discuss this in that setting even though I didn't say why I couldn't. If I was just a general participant and not a teacher, there would not have been a problem for me to deviate.

Anyhow, an excellent book on this was "Let Your (Informed) Conscience Be Your Guide", which I had picked up at my church a couple of decades ago.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
You may advocate a a more personal interpretation, but I do not believe this in reality is accepted by the Roman Church.
See my last post.

As one who had been a teacher within the Church and has returned to it, I have lived this out. Even our current priest well knows my questioning, and yet he wants me to return to teaching our RCIA program that deals with adult conversions, and last week I decided to accept that role starting in October.


BTW, the traffic officer analogy I used was not of my own creation but was from a Trappist monk from Northern Ireland who left the order and became a parish priest who presided at our parish a couple of decades ago.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Dear Evols,

Inside your own unbelieving body. You have the DNA of Mt. Eve...AND...the human intelligence of Adam. You, as a Species, inherited your DNA long BEFORE you evolved into a human being. Mt. Eve was NOT human. She did NOT descend from Adam. Did she?

You inherited Adam's superior intelligence from Adam, in the SAME way you got your DNA from Mt. Eve. The foolish Theory of Evolution wants you to believe the Fairy Tale that mindless Nature and long periods of time and uncounted mutations changed you into a Human. What Tripe. What foolishness.

The evidence that you descended from Adam, the first human, is overwhelming since NO Ape and NO other creature on the face of this Earth is able to carry on a conversion with either one of us, and NONE of them posts. That is because mindless Nature does NOT create Human intelligence in Apes, as some mindless Evols insist. You get it from your parents, and NO Ape has EVER evolved into a human. That's God's Truth.

BTW, God's Truth is the ONE Truth. God's Truth MUST agree in every way with every discovery of science and history, or it is NOT God's Truth. God's Truth exposes the biggest False assumption, in Science today, and that is the False Theory of Evolution. Evolution does not agree with scripture NOR history. That's because evolution is a Lie. What is referred to as MicroEvolution is nothing but Adaptation within kinds. Today's Science just doesn't know the difference in His kinds.
What did I tell you about wild handflapping?

You just showed that you have no evidence all that you have is hysteria.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Noah's flood exposes the weakness, the Achilles Heel of the False Theory of Evolution. Some Godless Evols have taken the Truth of MicroEvolution or changes within His kinds, and changed it into the unsupported, speculative LIE that God used evolution to Create. Not so, and God's Holy Word refutes such an ignorant idea.

Noah's Flood shows that Noah and his family came into our 2nd Heaven, from the 1st Heaven, the world of Adam, which was totally "dissolved" in the Flood. This happened some 10k years ago and Human civilization, on this Planet, can be traced to Noah's arrival in the mountains of Ararat, in Northern Mesopotamia, the Cradle of Human Civilization.

Without the Flood, we might be stuck with the stupid idea that we evolved from other animals, but the Flood shows that Humanity on our Earth, came from another world. Humans were made long BEFORE any other living creature. Genesis 2:4-7 That's God's Truth, which agrees in EVERY way with EVERY discovery of Science and History.

One thing God's Truth DISAGREES with is the False ToE, which is nothing but a Lie of Godless men who are afraid to be righteously judged for their evil deeds, so they made up an incomplete, untrue, False assumption, and called it the ToE. They did NOT consider God's Truth when they made fools of themselves with their unsupportable Theory, and now it's time for their Lies to be exposed.

Humans did NOT evolve from Apes and there is NO evidence which can stand when measured against God's Truth. Want to try to support the man-made, error filled, Theory of Evolution? I don't believe ANY of you can?
Noah's flood is a myth. There is no evidence for it ever occurring.

The theory of evolution is supported by mountains of evidence complied over 150+ by many multiple groups of independent scientists operating all over the world in multiple different scientific fields. It is probably the most well-evidenced scientific theory in existence.

Just saying "evolution isn't true because Noah's flood shows that it isn't" will not get you anywhere. What you need to do to convince people of your claims is to produce evidence that backs them up.
 

Seve

Member
What did I tell you about wild handflapping?

You just showed that you have no evidence all that you have is hysteria.

Dear Evols,

There is no more credible source than God's Holy Word written in the Scripture. It's the standard against which all other "supposed" Truths of man can be measured. I have listed several things which NO ancient man of 3k years ago could have possibly known, which are written in Genesis. All of them agree in every way with the latest discoveries of Science and History.

One of my favorites is the FACT that Gen. 2:4 tells us the Big Bang was on the 3rd Day, and Genesis 1:17 tells us the Stars were made long AFTER the Big Bang, on the 4th Day. Science has learned exactly the same thing.

First was the BB, then Millions of years of darkness when there was NO light. Out of the darkness came the Light of the first enormous Stars, which matured, and exploded, and scattered the matter from their interiors into the Universe and today it's in every person alive.

Perhaps the problem is in your interpretation. That's WHY I like God's Truth which agrees in every way with every discovery of Science and History. Can YOU tell us HOW ancient man could have possibly known that we live in a Multiverse with at least 2 other universes? Physics equations tell us we could live with 11 other Universes, today. Ancient man, and many people today STILL don't know this, and yet it's written in Genesis. IT's PROOF of God because NO man could have possibly known this at the time.

That's God's Truth. Refute it IF you can. I don't think you can. Fool me.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Dear Evols,

There is no more credible source than God's Holy Word written in the Scripture. It's the standard against which all other "supposed" Truths of man can be measured. I have listed several things which NO ancient man of 3k years ago could have possibly known, which are written in Genesis. All of them agree in every way with the latest discoveries of Science and History.

One of my favorites is the FACT that Gen. 2:4 tells us the Big Bang was on the 3rd Day, and Genesis 1:17 tells us the Stars were made long AFTER the Big Bang, on the 4th Day. Science has learned exactly the same thing.

First was the BB, then Millions of years of darkness when there was NO light. Out of the darkness came the Light of the first enormous Stars, which matured, and exploded, and scattered the matter from their interiors into the Universe and today it's in every person alive.

Perhaps the problem is in your interpretation. That's WHY I like God's Truth which agrees in every way with every discovery of Science and History. Can YOU tell us HOW ancient man could have possibly known that we live in a Multiverse with at least 2 other universes? Physics equations tell us we could live with 11 other Universes, today. Ancient man, and many people today STILL don't know this, and yet it's written in Genesis. IT's PROOF of God because NO man could have possibly known this at the time.

That's God's Truth. Refute it IF you can. I don't think you can. Fool me.

Once again you put the burden of proof upon yourself. If you want to claim the Bible as a source you put the burden of proof upon yourself again. And no, the Bible fails time after time when compared to what we know from the sciences. Since you do not understand the sciences at all why don't we start from the beginning. Would you like to discus the scientific method so you do not continue to make such errors?
 

Seve

Member
Once again you put the burden of proof upon yourself. If you want to claim the Bible as a source you put the burden of proof upon yourself again. And no, the Bible fails time after time when compared to what we know from the sciences. Since you do not understand the sciences at all why don't we start from the beginning. Would you like to discus the scientific method so you do not continue to make such errors?

Dear Evols,

My experience is that it's mostly Evols who complain about everything in order to change the subject away from their ignorance of our true origins. Are you another of those people who has no idea of how or when we magically evolved from Ape to Human intelligence? If so, I'll get ready to read more of your complaints.

BTW, The Evols here have been unable to come up with a human city older than those built by Noah's great grandsons. Do you have ANY data which might explain WHY there were NO human cities until Noah arrived? And NO farming, and NO math nor ANY of the traits of modern humans? Could it be because there were NO humans on this Planet until Noah arrived?

Help the poor Evols here for they are losing so badly. God has refuted their beloved Theory of Evolution, and all they can seem to do about it is whine. Can YOU provide any assistance for them? Show us the data, and give some needed help to put Darwin back where he belongs. Will you help or will you hide from God's Truth?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Dear Evols,

My experience is that it's mostly Evols who complain about everything in order to change the subject away from their ignorance of our true origins. Are you another of those people who has no idea of how or when we magically evolved from Ape to Human intelligence? If so, I'll get ready to read more of your complaints.

BTW, The Evols here have been unable to come up with a human city older than those built by Noah's great grandsons. Do you have ANY data which might explain WHY there were NO human cities until Noah arrived? And NO farming, and NO math nor ANY of the traits of modern humans? Could it be because there were NO humans on this Planet until Noah arrived?

Help the poor Evols here for they are losing so badly. God has refuted their beloved Theory of Evolution, and all they can seem to do about it is whine. Can YOU provide any assistance for them? Show us the data, and give some needed help to put Darwin back where he belongs. Will you help or will you hide from God's Truth?
Noah is mythical. Another failure.
 

Seve

Member
Noah is mythical. Another failure.

Dear Godless Evol,

Where have YOU been? I have posted evidence from Scripture, Science, and History and NOT a single refute has come back to me. WHEN do you think the rest of you will get around to posting evidence of ANYthing but disagreement, which you have with EVERY other Christian?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Dear Godless Evol,

Where have YOU been? I have posted evidence from Scripture, Science, and History and NOT a single refute has come back to me. WHEN do you think the rest of you will get around to posting evidence of ANYthing but disagreement, which you have with EVERY other Christian?
Scripture is not evidence. It is what is being debated. Science does not support you. Nor does history. When are you going to post some reliable evidence?

You refute your own posts by your inability to support them. And you have been endlessly refuted.

But go ahead. Let's see some reliable evidence.
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The evidence for evolution and billions of years of history is demonstrated by science beyond any reasonable doubt, and the fundamentalist view of Creation has absolutely no basis in science nor the simple reality of the physical nature of our earth, solar system and universe as it is.

You just need to step back and take a much broader view on this. There is nothing in your teaching or belief that precludes the idea that God intended his creation to develop over time, as in millions of years to mature into the physical state we are in today.


:)-
 
Top