Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[Mister Agenda]

"Molecule to Man" evolution can not be true because it goes against what Scripture teaches. That is probably why they take that stance.

Which is not a scientific position. One of the primary challenges of science is to eliminate the contamination of the bias of scientists. The bias of AIG is foundational.

And wouldn't youer efforts be better focused on convincing us that your particular scriptures are so reliable that should the evidence in front of our noses tell us one thing and scripture another, that we should go with the scripture? Because if that's the root of your conviction, how do you think you'll be found compelling if you're hacking at the branches?

Profound but we believe science and the Bible are in harmony.

It seems to require that you disbelieve a large swathe of science and further disbelieve that isn't disharmony in order for you to believe that.

I said I would present 7 arguments and leave if I felt that have been addressed satisfactory. I would like to present Argument #2.

I don't see any reason why you shouldn't.

---

I wonder what would of happened if you lived in Jesus' day and asked, "Rabbi, did we come from monkeys?"

Same thing as would have happened if you asked 'Rabbi, does the earth go around the sun?'

---

They are standing firm on what they believe to be true. True to the Word of God and what the evidence is showing them. I commend them for that.

The only thing they demonstrate is that evidence can be made to say anything if you torture it enough. The same is true of scripture.

---

Maybe that is why Jesus said this:
Mat 18:3 and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Gullible like children?