Greg Jennings
New member
Why specifically do you accept the Bible, but reject Islam? What makes one superior over the other?
Creation vs. Evolution II
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
Greg, carbon dating has not been explained to me ten times, but I know it is cow pie. He's not parroting what he knows to be false; he's just letting you realize it with a deafening thud; what you all told us was definitely a great error. I've made a couple great errors too, but I apologized for them, and it did not make my error factual.
Why don't you, in kind, explain the opposite, with a credible source. You make us Creationists do all of the work, all of the time! What do you think 6days is, a walking set of encyclopedias?? You expect too much, methinks!!
The Bible IS always true!! The magicians in the time of Moses also cast their staffs to the ground, and made them turn into snakes, but when Moses cast down his staff to the ground, it had turned into a larger snake and it ate their snakes. Moses went to pick up his snake and it turned back to a staff in his hand. If Jesus can turn ordinary water into fantastically delicious wine, then I don't know why you don't believe in miracles done by God and Jesus.
By the way, Lot's wife turned into a 'pillar' of salt, not a pile of salt. Who knows WHAT she saw when she turned around to behold Sodom, and Gomorrah, being destroyed by God?? She was told not to turn around, but it went in one ear and out the other. She most likely saw the land being dissolved by a sulfur-based fire from the Lord upon the two cities. Similar to the sun's fire. If God wanted us to know more about it, I'm sure He would have let Lot know. God CAN change a person's chemical composition to be turned into the chemicals of salt. He's a Great Chemist and Biologist. Look how many times I've told you all that? I will not liken it to tens of tens of times, because it has not been even ten times, so there you have it!
I do hope that you had an Exceptional Birthday, yesterday!! Enjoy being young, still. Life is like a roller-coaster. Hang on tight! There are more amazing things that are going to happen than all of that!! The Lord God can change the chemical makeup of things to turn things into whatever He wants, to be honest!!!
Feliz Cumpleanos {Happy Birthday, in Spanish},
Michael
Last edited:
Dear redfern,
I've read all of your responses and to me they are deft, simple & rubbish!! You can't changed a sassy old lady into a pillar of salt because you aren't God or the Master Chemist? As to the remainder of your answers, no, the rapture will not happen before the end of 2016!! It takes a moron to ask questions like these, but I am hardly a moron for answering them, since your little heart wants to know and I have a bit of time to give you.
Michael
Dear Greg,
Oh, it's okay to believe in God as long as we believe in evolution too?? Don't even try that one, dude! You'll concede if we concede? That doesn't sit right with me and, I believe, with my close friends also!!
There was and is no reason to believe in evolution and the garbage that comes with it. We recognize it as impossible. You just latched on to a guy you thought sounded right and had a new angle of belief. I know what truly happened as explained to me by the Lord. This Darwin fellow looked around at different apes, chimps, and men, and saw how they were so similar, so he tried to say that man was a descendant of chimps, like Satan confused him to actually proclaim! And so he enfranchised it to include plants and animals too!! You all should know better!!
Michael
Yes, Everready, it is all a cooked-up scheme proposed by Satan/ the devil. We believers in Christ don't bother believing it whatsoever!
May God Bless You Tons!!
Michael
Greg Jennings
New member
Islam does not agree that Jesus died, or that Jesus is God. The Muslim thoughts on Jesus are echoed by the much older Gospel of Balisides that was discarded due to its "heretical nature" along with many other non-canonical gospels.
It praises the OT as truth, and agrees with much of the NT, except the most important part of course
As long as you acknowledge the key differences above, sure.
Last edited:
Jose Fly
New member
So does everyone see what just happened here?
Over the last couple of days the question at hand related to 6days' claim that there are "thousands of PhD scientists who reject common ancestry". But 6days provided absolutely no support for that claim, so it was challenged. And how did 6days respond?
By completely ignoring it, exactly as he did just a few days prior when he was challenged to explain why he deliberately omitted half of a dictionary definition. All he does is ignore it, throw out a few red herrings, and hope at least one of the "evolutionists" here will take the bait and follow him, thereby letting him off the hook.
The sad thing is....it apparently works.
Over the last couple of days the question at hand related to 6days' claim that there are "thousands of PhD scientists who reject common ancestry". But 6days provided absolutely no support for that claim, so it was challenged. And how did 6days respond?
By completely ignoring it, exactly as he did just a few days prior when he was challenged to explain why he deliberately omitted half of a dictionary definition. All he does is ignore it, throw out a few red herrings, and hope at least one of the "evolutionists" here will take the bait and follow him, thereby letting him off the hook.
The sad thing is....it apparently works.
Greg Jennings
New member
I don't think talking with him is letting him off the hook. Just keep reminding him of the question. That makes it clear to everyone, including his creationist buddies, that he's dodging
6days
New member
Sure there are! There are many in Australia, Canada, Usa, UK, and even Russia. One of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, South Korea may have the most active group of Bible believing scientists. Also, keep in mind that many creationist scientists don't add their names to these lists for fear of some type of retribution.
Jose Fly
New member
Again, the pattern is obvious. When backed into a corner ("why did you deliberately leave out half the definition", "where are these thousands of PhD scientists who reject common ancestry"), 6days' MO is to ignore the issue, introduce another set of talking points, and hope people follow him down those rabbit trails while forgetting about the issues he ignored.
So you have to ask yourself....are you one of those who follow the rabbit trails, or are you more prone to say something like "Let's not move on to other topics until you address this outstanding issue"?
Jose Fly
New member
All you've done is restate the original unsubstantiated assertion.
The fact remains, you have provided absolutely zero evidence that there are "thousands of PhD scientists who reject common ancestry".
Greg Jennings
New member
Unless I'm the one that has him in a corner, I do follow the rabbit trails. As I've said before, I'm here for entertainment. I gave up on proving anything to creationists a while back.
I'll stay out of it until he replies to you properly
6days
New member
JoseFly said:
The fact remains...you are a bit of a goofball. If you are truely interested in the number of Scientists who reject Darwinism / common ancestry... do just a wee bit of research. I have seen estimates that there may be as many as 50,000 Bible believing scientists worldwide.*
2% of Scientists in USA alone say that humans have always existed in present form. (PEW research). So, in America alone there would be a few thousand.*There are many also in Australia, Canada, UK, Russia and more. One of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, South Korea may have the most active group of Bible believing scientists.*
Jose Fly
New member
And that's what he counts on....as long as there are multiple "evolutionists" here, when one corners him he can always just ignore it and start up on a different topic with someone else. And as long as it works, he'll keep doing it.
For me, part of the entertainment is seeing how someone like 6days reacts when people don't fall for his dishonest, lazy tactics. What does he do when those things no longer work?
Or you could join in! :up:
Jose Fly
New member
You made the claim, therefore it falls on you to back it up.
Another empty claim.
Again, all you're doing is repeating your completely unsubstantiated claim.
I suspect 6 days is correct, there are thousands of scientists who "reject Darwinism/common ancestry". But how many are biologists who have actually spent time studying, oh lets use his terms "Darwinism/common ancestry"? In support of his argument, he needs to use engineers, chemists, medical doctors, etc. Sorry, not good enough, when he trots out thousands of PhD biologists who question "Darwinism/common ancestry" I take notice. Until then all 6 days has is his consistent "science supports god's word" mantra. On that he is either consistently ignorant or a consistent liar.
Jose, be careful. You know 6days is no slouch at weaseling out of uncomfortable situations like this. Look carefully at what he said, and at his most recent response to you. His initial claim was:
You focused on having 6days back that claim, and he responded with:
Catch that? Now he is counting not just PhDs who reject common ancestry, but is including in his count generic “scientists” who are “Bible believing”.
Scientist: “a person engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge that describes and predicts the natural world … an individual who uses the scientific method” (Wiki)
A grade-school dropout who knows and uses the scientific method can legitimately be called a scientist, and thus may be in the group that 6days now speaks of. Plus technicians, laboratory assistants, students, etc. now can be counted by 6days.
And “Bible believing”? How many Catholics are Bible believing scientists, and what is the position of the Catholic Church on evolution? And how about the ASA – an organization specifically of Christians who work in the sciences, and have issued multiple position papers distancing themselves from Young Earth Creationism?
6days said “PhD Scientists”. Hold him to that, unless he is willing to admit he cannot support his case, and has to open the door much wider to get the numbers he is claiming.