Argument #1: Transitional Fossils

[Simon Moon]

I am learning that if I cite anything from AiG that you will instantly reject it. So I will try to incorporate other sources.

Yes, because they are proven liars.

But more importantly, they do not do scientific work. They are lobbyists.

[Revelation777]

#1 - welcome to a world that we chose by rebelling and introducing sin, chaos, unfairness, and disorder

Yeah, it's not God's fault Rev777 was born without half of a normal, functioning brain. It's ours.

So because I believe in Intelligent Design I'm an imbecile? Then President Obama is one too I guess.

[Simon Moon]

Not nearly as much holes as Darwinism.

Then why don't you put your 'money where your mouth is' and stop getting treated with modern medicine. A great deal of it is based on evolutionary theory.

[Revelation777]

#1 - welcome to a world that we chose by rebelling and introducing sin, chaos, unfairness, and disorder

#2 - Thou shalt not steal. Disobey?

#3 - The reason for starvation in the world is poverty. If the 1% of the world's wealthiest gave a mere fraction or a fraction of their wealth to feeding the world's hungry there would be no problem here. The problem here is not God who gave us a planet that easily can produce enough food for everyone, but greed.
http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Lear...202002.htm

#4 - When did God ever tell us to do that? He said be fruitful and multiply

So then God is NOT the answer you prefer?

Boru

---

My beef is with "Molecule to Man" evolution.

Who the hell are you to tell God how to accomplish his miracles? If God chose to have molecules evolve into human beings, isn't that a much greater achievement that simply creating life ex nihilo? Double Check the scripture you claim to love so much. Particularly Genesis 1:24.

'And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.' (and before you pounce on the inconsequentiality of the term 'kind', nowhere does Genesis say or imply that these 'kinds' are immutable).

Even according to the Bible, God didn't simply create life, he did something much more impressive - he had the inanimate earth create life. And yet you come in here, with your stupefying ignorance of basic science (not to mention basic theology) and proceed to limit what your all powerful God can do.

Boru

Very good point Boru. If you want to agree with me that God started life then I would gladly toast an ice cold beer with you.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Yeah, it's not God's fault Rev777 was born without half of a normal, functioning brain. It's ours.

So because I believe in Intelligent Design I'm an imbecile? Then President Obama is one too I guess.

Congrats on being a liar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFsB1Jk1OQ0

"I'm a Christian, and I believe in parents being able to provide children with religious instruction without interference from the state. But I also believe our schools are there to teach worldly knowledge and science. I believe in evolution, and I believe there's a difference between science and faith. That doesn't make faith any less important than science. It just means they're two different things. And I think it's a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of science with theories that frankly don't hold up to scientific inquiry."

Obama during a York Daily Record interview

Your argument has been thoroughly debunked, and you are losing face by spewing lies and your unsupported beliefs.

You lost this argument, do you have any more to present, or was that also a lie?

[Duke Guilmon]

Not nearly as much holes as Darwinism.

darwin is out dated, so darwinism was never anybodies position.

[Revelation777]

Yes yes, desire, ignorance (hatred, envy, anger) have brought a world full of suffering. 4 BCE, Buddhism.

Religious wars directly attributable to Christianity:
http://godandwar.wikispaces.com/List+of+Religious+Wars

Well over 100 religiously based wars since 1 CE. Not including the inquisition, crusades, and more.

Religious wars directly attributable to Buddhism:

I'm not aware of any. Now, there are Buddhist countries that go to war, but I can't think of a specific instance of Buddhists deciding they need to wipe out the Christians.

It's not as if anyone disagrees with you in spirit: things aren't always great, because people are assholes and behave like them. It's that your religious tradition and explanations for why suffering exists, while maintaining we live in a perfect creation under a perfect creator deity who sometimes gets really pissed, and kills everyone, or has continued to punish us for 7,000 of years because he created a woman who happened to like apples: it's just not particularly compelling.

Your religious tradition brings forth nothing new, it causes hatred, bigotry, idolatry, shame for being biological beings, and basic facts of life, and generally requests that everyone shut their "god given" capacity for reason off and unplug their brains so we can tell this supposed eternal, perfect, omniscient, benevolent creator/BDSM fanatic in the sky how much we love and worship him, and deny any knowledge that might contradict a set of a 2000 year old book, and a 3-4000 year old book that is only accepted as canon when convenient.

There's nothing particularly compelling in either book, except as antique legends and folklore of history, thoroughly embellished to the point that there are 33,000 unique "Christian" denominations who all disagree on the greater meanings behind the contradicting stories in the books.

So you tell us, as someone who has promised a set of seven arguments that will make those of us who have read and examined this body of work critically reconsider, and join you in denying empirical scientific facts about the world around us out of deference to your specific interpretation out of 33,000 sects in your particular religion, discounting the other 4,200 separate religions, each with their own number of sects who disagree on the exact canon of their beliefs and explain to us why your specific sect deserves special consideration above all others, so extensively as to refute the most basic scientific facts of the 21st century; because "I strongly believe this is true" is just not compelling.

If you find yourself unable to provide a cogent reason without biblical scripture, or waxing poetic about how your reborn messianic figure deserves special consideration out of countless others, even contemporarily [ http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m..._claimants ] can we please move on to argument #2?

Yes, I am getting ready for Argument #2 but want to prepare a concluding statement to this thread.

OK,,, let me say, as Jesus even warned, many would come in His name saying they were doing His Will, using His Name, and yet He will tell them when they are judged that "I NEVER KNEW YOU." So the title Christian is thrown around like the word love but to me the consistent obedience to the teaching is the best indicator to the authenticity of the label.

Yes, there are a lot of denominations and Jesus gave a parable of the birds nesting in the branches in predicting this would occur. If you look at all these denominations one thing is common. A governing body that has either added or taken away from the original Biblical text. The addition of man made rules which the Lord never intended. Just because someone is a true believer doesn't mean they are not capable of sin or error. I being the one exception.

---

Seems like you have made some harsh judgmental statements towards people you don't share the same views towards.

Such as "if you reject Jesus you will spend an eternity in Hell"?

The message is one of love and forgiveness. I hope you don't choose to be in a place of separation from the source of love, life, and grace. It is not a place He desires anyone to choose.

---

Asked who? Jesus or any rabbi who happened to be passing?

If Jesus told you that we descended from earlier primate ancestors in central Africa, I might actually be tempted to take him seriously because it's evidence he isn't a total fraud.

If Jesus said that then I would of believed Him.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Yes yes, desire, ignorance (hatred, envy, anger) have brought a world full of suffering. 4 BCE, Buddhism.

Religious wars directly attributable to Christianity:
http://godandwar.wikispaces.com/List+of+Religious+Wars

Well over 100 religiously based wars since 1 CE. Not including the inquisition, crusades, and more.

Religious wars directly attributable to Buddhism:

I'm not aware of any. Now, there are Buddhist countries that go to war, but I can't think of a specific instance of Buddhists deciding they need to wipe out the Christians.

It's not as if anyone disagrees with you in spirit: things aren't always great, because people are assholes and behave like them. It's that your religious tradition and explanations for why suffering exists, while maintaining we live in a perfect creation under a perfect creator deity who sometimes gets really pissed, and kills everyone, or has continued to punish us for 7,000 of years because he created a woman who happened to like apples: it's just not particularly compelling.

Your religious tradition brings forth nothing new, it causes hatred, bigotry, idolatry, shame for being biological beings, and basic facts of life, and generally requests that everyone shut their "god given" capacity for reason off and unplug their brains so we can tell this supposed eternal, perfect, omniscient, benevolent creator/BDSM fanatic in the sky how much we love and worship him, and deny any knowledge that might contradict a set of a 2000 year old book, and a 3-4000 year old book that is only accepted as canon when convenient.

There's nothing particularly compelling in either book, except as antique legends and folklore of history, thoroughly embellished to the point that there are 33,000 unique "Christian" denominations who all disagree on the greater meanings behind the contradicting stories in the books.

So you tell us, as someone who has promised a set of seven arguments that will make those of us who have read and examined this body of work critically reconsider, and join you in denying empirical scientific facts about the world around us out of deference to your specific interpretation out of 33,000 sects in your particular religion, discounting the other 4,200 separate religions, each with their own number of sects who disagree on the exact canon of their beliefs and explain to us why your specific sect deserves special consideration above all others, so extensively as to refute the most basic scientific facts of the 21st century; because "I strongly believe this is true" is just not compelling.

If you find yourself unable to provide a cogent reason without biblical scripture, or waxing poetic about how your reborn messianic figure deserves special consideration out of countless others, even contemporarily [ http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m..._claimants ] can we please move on to argument #2?

Yes, I am getting ready for Argument #2 but want to prepare a concluding statement to this thread.

OK,,, let me say, as Jesus even warned, many would come in His name saying they were doing His Will, using His Name, and yet He will tell them when they are judged that "I NEVER KNEW YOU." So the title Christian is thrown around like the word love but to me the consistent obedience to the teaching is the best indicator to the authenticity of the label.

Irrelevant to anything in this thread at all, throwing out a No True Scotsman fallacy does not disprove the lists of transitional fossils that were provided and promptly ignored.

Yes, there are a lot of denominations and Jesus gave a parable of the birds nesting in the branches in predicting this would occur. If you look at all these denominations one thing is common. A governing body that has either added or taken away from the original Biblical text. The addition of man made rules which the Lord never intended. Just because someone is a true believer doesn't mean they are not capable of sin or error. I being the one exception.

---

Such as "if you reject Jesus you will spend an eternity in Hell"?

The message is one of love and forgiveness. I hope you don't choose to be in a place of separation from the source of love, life, and grace. It is not a place He desires anyone to choose.

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. — Luke 19:27 1

Luke 12:49-56
New Living Translation (NLT)
Jesus Causes Division

49 “I have come to set the world on fire, and I wish it were already burning! 50 I have a terrible baptism of suffering ahead of me, and I am under a heavy burden until it is accomplished. 51 Do you think I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I have come to divide people against each other! 52 From now on families will be split apart, three in favor of me, and two against—or two in favor and three against.

53 ‘Father will be divided against son
and son against father;
mother against daughter
and daughter against mother;
and mother-in-law against daughter-in-law

[Revelation777]

That is why it is unrealistic and deceptive to draw a rendering of an "transitional" organism when all you have is a tooth and a part of a jawbone.

You're, of course, aware that science isn't made from the drawings and artistic depictions which are based on very incomplete fossils, aren't you?
The science that comes through to the masses is very simplified and the drawings help the public relate... the actual scientists couldn't care less about those drawings.... so I fail to understand why you keep bringing them forward...

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Can't we learn from the artful rendering of Nebraska Man? So now I have to buy into every rendering made from fossils that are supposed to be the missing link or a proof of a transitional organism? No, sir, no.


http://rdlindsey.com/flashfacts/Nebraska.html

---

I hope someday in the future you evolve from foul language and insults.

I hope that someday in the future you evolve from ignorance and closed-mindedness to knowledge and wisdom.

You are worse than completely ignorant of what evolution is - you have adopted lies and misinformation.

Read a book on evolution written by an actual scientist or just shut the fuck up.

What book do you suggest?

---

but can you respect that?

No, because silly personal beliefs are not above reproach and do not necessarily deserve respect.

Well I respect you but not your silly beliefs.

---

That is why it is unrealistic and deceptive to draw a rendering of an "transitional" organism when all you have is a tooth and a part of a jawbone.

You've been given several extensive lists of transitional fossils. Straw manning this extensive list as "a part of a jawbone and some teeth" is extremely dishonest.

Instead of dismissing the source, retort it. Many shrugged off and laughed at Jesus' words as well. Doesn't mean it isn't true. They said, "Is this not the carpenter's son?"

Hello in there Rev, can you hear me? Is this thing on?

Your source, AiG, has already been thoroughly retorted, disproven, shown to be a biased and false collection of fake straw men.

Answers in Genesis (AiG) is a non-profit Christian apologetics ministry with a particular focus on supporting young Earth creationism by interpreting scientific evidence in favor of a young earth, which differs from the scientific consensus on the matter. It also advocates a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis.[2]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Answers_in_Genesis

Your source is being laughed off because it has been examined, and shown to be fake science, and yet you keep posting it, because it says what you want to hear. Not unlike a Flat-Earther, Bigfoot believer or Alien Abductee.

Claiming it hasn't only shows you have not bothered to click a single link in any of the replies in between searching AiG for something to copy-paste.

The biblical passages you're quoting do not support your argument about transitional fossils, and every claim you've made has been thoroughly debunked.

Time to hike up your Big Boy Pants and move on.

If AiG is soooooo disreputably, then why did Bill Nye bother wasting his time debating Ken Ham?

[pocaracas]

You're, of course, aware that science isn't made from the drawings and artistic depictions which are based on very incomplete fossils, aren't you?
The science that comes through to the masses is very simplified and the drawings help the public relate... the actual scientists couldn't care less about those drawings.... so I fail to understand why you keep bringing them forward...

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. Can't we learn from the artful rendering of Nebraska Man? So now I have to buy into every rendering made from fossils that are supposed to be the missing link or a proof of a transitional organism? No, sir, no.


http://rdlindsey.com/flashfacts/Nebraska.html

Man... I didn't even have to read past the first paragraph!

The top scientists of the world examined this tooth and appraised it as proof positive of a prehistoric race in America.

Did they examine the drawings?

Oh, also

Tennessee, in 1925.

What sort of place is Tennessee? (it rhymes with what holds up your pants and also with the sole book you read)