Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)

Options
1…801802804806807…822

Comments

  • Options
    #24092
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    J C wrote: »
    ... No pretence ... no ignorace ... and a true Christian.

    We already established on the A&A forum that this isn't the case. What ever kick you get from pretending to be a Christian to troll Boards.ie it is simply sad to see genuine posters duped by your nonsense.


  • Options
    #24093
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    Wicknight wrote: »
    And yet Wolfsbane thanked it. Really makes you wonder if we are wasting our time with Wolfsbane. Some times he seems like he is genuinely interested, and others he just seems like your standard Creationist.

    Of course you're wasting your time. The best you can hope for is that actual onlookers into the thread will realise what a load of religious nonsense creationism really is.


  • Options
    #24094
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    Like I have already said, all of my points are verifiable facts ... all anybody needs to do is scan this thread to verify them!!!
    J C wrote: »
    2. (Ecolutionists) refer to micro-evolution ... the ratio of grey moths to white ones moving from 90:10 to 10:90 ... for example ... and say that this proves that Moths could become Humans if given enough time ... even though all it proves is that Moths remain Moths!!!

    Please verify this (I can't) with your next post or it's 2-0.:D


  • Options
    #24095
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    wrote:
    Originally Posted by J C
    2. (Evolutionists) refer to micro-evolution ... the ratio of grey moths to white ones moving from 90:10 to 10:90 ... for example ... and say that this proves that Moths could become Humans if given enough time ... even though all it proves is that Moths remain Moths!!!

    himnextdoor
    Please verify this (I can't) with your next post or it's 2-0.:D
    I said that Evolutionists believe that micro-evolution e.g. Moth colour changes prove that 'crawling things' could have evolved into Mankind over millions of years ... so are you now saying that changes in Moth colour are just that ... changes in Moth colour ... and have no proof value for the idea that Pondkind evolved into Mankind???
    ... because, if you are, it is game, set and match to Creation Science!!!:eek::D


  • Options
    #24096
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    J C wrote: »
    I said that Evolutionists believe that micro-evolution e.g. Moth colour changes prove that 'crawling things' could have evolved into Mankind over millions of years ... so are you now saying that changes in Moth colour are just that ... changes in Moth colour ... and have no proof value for the idea that Pondkind evolved into Mankind???
    ... because, if you are, it is game, set and match to Creation Science!!!:eek::D

    Verify that the moth remains a moth.

    You can't because you don't have a scientific definition of what is a "moth". You can define a species but there are thousands of example of evolution producing new species.

    Evolutionists 2 - Creationists 0 ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #24097
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    I said that Evolutionists believe that micro-evolution e.g. Moth colour changes prove that 'crawling things' could have evolved into Mankind over millions of years ... so are you now saying that changes in Moth colour are just that ... changes in Moth colour ... and have no proof value for the idea that Pondkind evolved into Mankind???
    ... because, if you are, it is game, set and match to Creation Science!!!:eek::D

    All an evolutionist has to do in order to expose the creationists for what they are is... nothing. He can just keep quiet and watch you self-destruct.


  • Options
    #24098
    liamw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    Wolfsbane, out of interest... do you think that someone can be both an evolutionist and a true christian at the same time? From what I understand J.C. thinks you cannot...


  • Options
    #24099
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    liamw wrote: »
    Of course you're wasting your time. The best you can hope for is that actual onlookers into the thread will realise what a load of religious nonsense creationism really is.

    Although, it is possible that this thread and the 'other' thread could become a reference source in Wiki that cites evidence against the Creationist position.

    Or, if someone asks "What does 'moving the goalposts' mean?" or "What is a 'non sequitur'?" ........

    Obviously the Evolutionists have planted a saboteur into the ranks of the Creationists... keep up the good work J C. :D:eek:


  • Options
    #24100
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,355 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    J C wrote: »
    Like I have already said, all of my points are verifiable facts ... all anybody needs to do is scan this thread to verify them!!!
    So you're saying in order to prove you are telling the truth you're asking people to search for posts of you saying things to verify that you are telling the truth?

    In that case, I'm going to leave this right here:

    Evolution is an undeniable, factual mechanic of biological nature

    now to incubate this for about 6 months and ask people to search the thread for when I proved that Evolution was proof positive, undeniable fact.


  • Options
    #24101
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Verify that the moth remains a moth.

    You can't because you don't have a scientific definition of what is a "moth". You can define a species but there are thousands of example of evolution producing new species.

    Evolutionists 2 - Creationists 0 ;)
    There are many examples of rapid (even instantaneous) speciation ... but always within Kinds.
    ... once again its game, set and match to Creation Science!!!:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #24102
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    All an evolutionist has to do in order to expose the creationists for what they are is... nothing. He can just keep quiet and watch you self-destruct.
    ... the only self-destruction on this thread is the case for Evolution ... but then, as it never occurred I don't blame you guys for not being able to prove it!!!

    If this is what you call 'winning' for Evolution ... I can't imagine what 'losing' looks like!!!:eek::)


  • Options
    #24103
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    liamw wrote: »
    Wolfsbane, out of interest... do you think that someone can be both an evolutionist and a true christian at the same time? From what I understand J.C. thinks you cannot...
    Prof Dawkins thinks that it is a delusion for Christians to try and reconcile Evolution with the Christian Faith ... and I also agree with him!!!

    As to whether Evolutionists can be Christians ... I think that it is possible ... God works in amazing ways His wonders to perform!!!:D


  • Options
    #24104
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    Or, if someone asks "What does 'moving the goalposts' mean?" or "What is a 'non sequitur'?" ........
    Evolution!!!:)


  • Options
    #24105
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Overheal wrote: »
    So you're saying in order to prove you are telling the truth you're asking people to search for posts of you saying things to verify that you are telling the truth?
    No ... I'm saying that my nine points are facts about how Evolutionists on this thread behave ... and what they believe.
    Overheal wrote: »
    In that case, I'm going to leave this right here:

    Evolution is an undeniable, factual mechanic of biological nature

    now to incubate this for about 6 months and ask people to search the thread for when I proved that Evolution was proof positive, undeniable fact.
    It all depends what you mean by that 'weasel word' "Evolution"?

    If you mean that populations change phenotype in respose to environmental pressures via Natural Selection of pre-existing genetic diversity then I agree that your statement is true ...
    ... but if you mean that the genetic diversity necessary to supposedly evolve mankind from Pondkind was spontaneously generated by the interaction of mutagenesis and NS then this is patently untrue and is the Biological equivalent of a perpetual motion machine i.e. rationally and physically impossible!!!


  • Options
    #24106
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    Obviously the Evolutionists have planted a saboteur into the ranks of the Creationists... keep up the good work J C. :D:eek:
    If they have ... then I have 'gone native' and actually destroyed Evolution instead!!!:D:)

    OOPS ... I have indeed... sorry guys ...

    ... actually, the case for Creation was so good that I just gave up the struggle (for Evolution) and I now dance with life (for Creation)!!!:D


  • Options
    #24107
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    J C wrote: »
    There are many examples of rapid (even instantaneous) speciation ... but always within Kinds.
    ... once again its game, set and match to Creation Science!!!:D

    So you can't verify it is moth.

    Good stuff JC, keep up the good trolling work ;)


  • Options
    #24108
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    ... the only self-destruction on this thread is the case for Evolution ... but then, as it never occurred I don't blame you guys for not being able to prove it!!!

    If this is what you call 'winning' for Evolution ... I can't imagine what 'losing' looks like!!!:eek::)

    Your reasoning against evolution seems based on the proposition that one cannot randomly generate letters and come up with legible text.

    This is where I think you are going wrong; rather than thinking of 'base-pairs' as the alphabet of the genetic code you should think of them as words in the genetic story.

    Randomly generated words very often actually do give rise to surprisingly intelligible information.

    Check out some of David Bowie's lyrics.:)


  • Options
    #24109
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Wicknight wrote: »
    So you can't verify it is moth.

    Good stuff JC, keep up the good trolling work ;)
    Of course it's verifiably a Moth ... and it hasn't even speciated ... it is merely an example of changed colour ratios within a population of the same species of Moth!!!

    I think that you must actually be a Creationist troll and sabateur within the world of Evolutionism!!!


  • Options
    #24110
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    Your reasoning against evolution seems based on the proposition that one cannot randomly generate letters and come up with legible text.

    This is where I think you are going wrong; rather than thinking of 'base-pairs' as the alphabet of the genetic code you should think of them as words in the genetic story.

    Randomly generated words very often actually do give rise to surprisingly intelligible information.

    Check out some of David Bowie's lyrics.:)
    ... but David Bowie possesses intelligence ... and has a mind ... so there is where your analogy with Materialistic Evolution ENDS!!!:)


  • Options
    #24111
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    J C wrote: »
    Of course it's verifiably a Moth ... and it hasn't even speciated ... it is merely an example of changed colour ratios within a population of the same species!!!

    LOL. Really, and how does one go about verifying this JC. Please tell, put your mythical science degree to work and explain that one to us. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #24112
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Wicknight wrote: »
    LOL. Really, and how does one go about verifying this JC. Please tell, put your mythical science degree to work and explain that one to us. :rolleyes:
    They are Peppered Moths ... and the colours are two phenotypes or morphs of the one (fully inter-breeding) species Biston betularia.

    ... please don't take my word for it ... have a look at Wikipedia if you don't believe me that they are a Moth ... and the same species!!!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth

    Why do you continue to argue about something that is obvious nonesence (that the Peppered Moth can't be verified to be a Moth) ?
    ... when there is less obvious nonesense within Evolution that you could argue about, with me !!!!:D


  • Options
    #24113
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    If they have ... then I have 'gone native' and actually destroyed Evolution instead!!!:D:)

    And yet it evolves.

    What I can't understand is why, instead of shaping the beaks of birds didn't God just make all flowers the same? One flower, one beak.

    If He'd gone that way, He could have taken the whole weekend off.:D


  • Options
    #24114
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    And yet it evolves.

    What I can't understand is why, instead of shaping the beaks of birds didn't God just make all flowers the same? One flower, one beak.

    If He'd gone that way, He could have taken the whole weekend off.:D
    ... but He was designing creatures with the pre-existing genetic information capacity to adapt to different (and changing) environments!!!:D

    What an awesome God He is!!!

    ... and He did take the whole weekend off ... as He didn't do any further work on the seventh day (which was Saturday) or since then!!!

    Our Creator God is actually on a well-deserved, never ending weekend break !!!:D
    ... notwithstanding the desire of Theistic Evolutionists to put Him back to work over millions of years designing some additional killing capacity into various creatures!!!:eek::D


  • Options
    #24115
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    ... but He was designing creatures with the pre-existing genetic information capacity to adapt to different (and changing) environments!!!:D

    What an awesome God He is!!!

    Surely it would have been easier to 'set the thermostat' to ensure exactly the right conditions for His creation.


  • Options
    #24116
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    Surely it would have been easier to 'set the thermostat' to ensure exactly the right conditions for His creation.
    That's what He did initially ... but He knew that Adam and Eve would 'upset the whole applecart' ... and trigger the chaos that we are still suffering from, by the injudicious use of their free will ... and He therefore built in adaptive capacities into all of His Created Kinds!!!:)


  • Options
    #24117
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    That's what He did initially ... but He knew that Adam and Eve would 'upset the whole applecart' ... and trigger the chaos that we are still suffering from by the injudicious use of their free will!!!:)

    I see, so God designed evolution as a mechanism to protect creation from humans.

    Again, wouldn't it be easier just to sort the humans out?


  • Options
    #24118
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    I see, so God designed evolution as a mechanism to protect creation from humans.

    Again, wouldn't it be easier just to sort the humans out?
    ... He could ... but that would be removing their free will.

    He will sort us all out on Judgement day ... and I sincerely hope that He will find you be a 'sheep' by then ... and not a 'goat'!!!:eek:


  • Options
    #24119
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    ... He could ... but that would be removing their free will.

    He will sort us all out on Judgement day ... and I sincerely hope that you will be a 'sheep' by then ... and not a 'goat'!!!:eek:

    Hmm, interesting; moths can't change into butterflies but goats can turn into sheep.


  • Options
    #24120
    J C
    Registered Users Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    himnextdoor wrote: »
    Hmm, interesting; moths can't change into butterflies but goats can turn into sheep.
    ... only spiritually speaking!!!
    ... the 'sheep' are children of God ... while the 'goats' are children of the devil ... and up until the moment of death they can freely choose to 'throw in their lot' with God ... and be Saved!!!

    You're not going to win these arguments ... because you are not just debating with me ... you are also debating with the Holy Spirit of God indwelling me ... and He is telling me that you desperately need to be Saved !!!

    I am begging you on bended knee to please go and get Saved ... just say that you believe on Jesus Christ (and really believe it) and He will Save you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #24121
    himnextdoor
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭himnextdoor


    J C wrote: »
    ... only spiritually speaking!!!
    ... the 'sheep' are children of God ... while the 'goats' are children of the devil ... and up until the moment of death they can freely choose to throw their lot in with God ... and be Saved!!!

    I must admit that I prefer your view of salvation to others I have heard but I think evolution is the key to survival.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement