Christian dun believe in Darwin's

Icemoon SG

Ah .. I thought Christians like to rely on Strong's Concordance and dictionary? probably enuff for the average Christian.

Icemoon SG

The show is trying to send a message that humans are corrupt. It is not about vampires, they are just tools for the plot.

You mean you fail to see that?

Shotgun SG

I supposed most of u believe that carbon dating methods yield accurate results of the age of cave paintings, rocks n etc. Unfortunately, from what I understand, that may not be necessarily true. Most results are usually inaccurate, and the researchers have to add in a certain number of years (for whatever justification) in order to align it with evolution "beliefs."

Honestly, i cannot believe that our human race has evolved by chance. Its impossible.

philia SG

So what exactly do you believe?

Do you actually believe something that bears no form and goes by the name of "God" created us humans?

Simply by the blow of His breath and POOF! comes humans, the smartest mammals on the planet earth. Even magic shows have potholes.

Shotgun SG

I believe in creation until the day i see a Pentium 4 PC grow out of the ground on its own.

Intelligence can only be created by a greater intelligence.

Northwind SG

Wrong wrong and wrong. We're still waiting for civilization to happen! Wink Razz

philia SG

Fact of the matter is, we are all in the process of evolution. Everyday, we are evolving in one way or another. We learnt that the earth rotates around the sun when Copernicus enlightened us with his theory. The introduction of cellphone itself is revolutionary to the world. God did not grant us with religion. Religion is conceived by us mankind and so is God Himself. We have evolved and thus we created God along with religion. Yet we believe that God blew life to us when we are His parents.

vito_corleone SG

they do? Laughing or is it just you?

Ray87 SG

Originally posted by girlnextdoor:

first we take the bible too literally then what abt the web?
[b]the answers to the scriptures are so.. un convincing.
ive seen this kind of stuff before and i still dont believe in evolution.
if evolutionists are so keen for pple to believe in it they'll do anything.
my opinion~! pleeeeeeeease dont quote this.[/b]

the reason is because you have poor logic. if i am too direct and that hurts your feeling, that's too bad. face it. and you are unconvinced by darwinian theory because internet articles are unconvincing. hey internet articles are not meant to be convincing. say, even if u come across a credible source, darwinian's full theory is not meant to be understood in a single reading. understanding sentence is not equals to understanding concepts.

Icemoon SG

This is not how the bible records the creation.

The verse states that God formed Adam from the ground (Adamah) and breathed into his nostrils a breath of life and man became a living creature.

In Hebrew, Vayitser Adonay Elohim et-ha'adam afar min-ha'adamah vayipach pe'apav nishmat chayim vayehi ha'adam lenefesh chayah.

So your description is actually wrong. There was already a body, a shell, for God to blow His breath. There is no POOF part.

Icemoon SG

I don't. I rather read ancient Jewish commentators like Rashi. Laughing

Icemoon SG

You played too much Sid Meier's game ah? Haha ..

philia SG

Originally posted by Icemoon:

This is not how the bible records the creation.

The verse states that God formed Adam from the ground (Adamah) and breathed into his nostrils a breath of life and man became a living creature.

In Hebrew, [b]Vayitser Adonay Elohim et-ha'adam afar min-ha'adamah vayipach pe'apav nishmat chayim vayehi ha'adam lenefesh chayah.

So your description is actually wrong. There was already a body, a shell, for God to blow His breath. There is no POOF part.[/b]

I think you fail to realize that my statement is meant to be satirical.

vito_corleone SG

i'm glad you like the works of my people. Laughing

crazy monkey SG

so Naoh Ark is abt a flood, the animals are just tools to the plot ? Laughing

Shotgun SG

So erm… can I ask, has any one observed evolution take place? Even in an experimental environment?

crazy monkey SG

12. Nobody has ever seen a new species evolve.

Speciation is probably fairly rare and in many cases might take centuries. Furthermore, recognizing a new species during a formative stage can be difficult, because biologists sometimes disagree about how best to define a species. The most widely used definition, Mayr's Biological Species Concept, recognizes a species as a distinct community of reproductively isolated populations--sets of organisms that normally do not or cannot breed outside their community. In practice, this standard can be difficult to apply to organisms isolated by distance or terrain or to plants (and, of course, fossils do not breed). Biologists therefore usually use organisms' physical and behavioral traits as clues to their species membership.

Nevertheless, the scientific literature does contain reports of apparent speciation events in plants, insects and worms. In most of these experiments, researchers subjected organisms to various types of selection -- for anatomical differences, mating behaviors, habitat preferences and other traits -- and found that they had created populations of organisms that did not breed with outsiders. For example, William R. Rice of the University of New Mexico and George W. Salt of the University of California at Davis demonstrated that if they sorted a group of fruit flies by their preference for certain environments and bred those flies separately over 35 generations, the resulting flies would refuse to breed with those from a very different environment.

Shotgun SG

Well, I've not been around the witness the creation of man or the universe, though I wish i have been.

But I've seen the creation of other stuff. Man's creation of Artificial intelligence, modern structures, sky scrapers. Artificial intelligence such as robots, computers didn evolve from single celled organisms, that I am sure.

Yet, I've not seen any signs of evolution. On the contrary, I've seen signs of genetic mutations, more and more diseases, cancer. According to the theory of evolution, shouldn't any changes to a species be for the "better" and survival of the species? I've not seen humans become resistant to cancer etc etc.

I really used to believe in evolution when I was in my sec school days. I believed in that the earth was billions of years old. It wasn't until my friend pointed me at the right perspective to look at things then I realised that the evolution theory is very flawed. In fact, after reading up more about this, that i realised that most scientific evidence proves creation rather than evolution.

After asking around, emailing a couple of people. I finally found out why. Evolution was never proven. It has been what has always been, a collection of theories that seem to fit. And only the ones that fit, would belong in the evolution theory.

One of them was the evolution of creatures. An example, the sea cucumber. According to evolution beliefs, the sea cucumber evolved a defense mechanism that allowed it to turn itself inside out for predators to eat some of its insides, so that the entire sea cucumber itself would survive the attack. They believed that was evolved. If the process to evolve such a defense took millions of years, sea-cucumbers would be extinct, cos most would have died in the process of trying to develop such an ability.

Another thing that evolution cannot answer is, where does the DNA to improve or evolve a creature come from? In order for a species to change and develop new capabilities, eg from monkey to man, there must be changes in the DNA. And yet, there has been no observation of variations in DNA towards the improvement of a species, not even in the tiniest step. All the research that has been done so far, required man's intervention to change and variate the dna.

(For those who are not sure of the implication of DNA. DNA are basically the building blocks of any living object. Its like a programming code containing the instructions for a creature's specification. Eg, black hair, blue eyes, lungs or gills etc.)

Because of all the above mentioned, i couldn't no longer bring myself to believe that things around us evolve or are evolving. I've only seen things mutate, and for the worse. Not for the better.

Shotgun SG

Good point. But, the fruit flies remained to be fruit flies don't they? They didn't become fireflies, unlike what evolution suggests. That that single celled organisms became fish which then came on land, some became apes and some eventually man. The species dont' change.

A dogs continue to remain as dogs, crocs as crocs, cats as cats. There maybe variations in their color, size, breeding habits, but no changes that could be even considered a step to becoming another species. No new dna was introduced. Those changes in size, breeding habits and etc, happened cos their DNA allowed for it.

We cannot say that probably after 3500 generations the fruitflies would become fireflies or smth else. We mustn't forget that in science, we need to be able to prove something by recording observations of the process. Science is not coming up with theories that seem to fit. Its is a study, a record, and observation and experimentation.

girlnextdoor SG

EHhh!!! haha u quoted!!!

« Previous Page Next Page »