What gave you that idea? That one made "Answers in Genesis" list of "arguments we think creationists should not use." It called the "If you're alive, your uncle has to be dead" argument.
If you'll go that far, why not accept the way He did it?
If Evolution
- Thread starter CherubRam
- Start date
What gave you that idea? That one made "Answers in Genesis" list of "arguments we think creationists should not use." It called the "If you're alive, your uncle has to be dead" argument.
If you'll go that far, why not accept the way He did it?
6days
New member
You were answered Greg, although it was mocking you a bit for not understanding your own 'argument. You first thought sharks gained a fin. Then you realized it was LOSS, or reduction of a fin.Greg Jennings said:
You were also told that there does not seem to be any such thing as a mutation that is neutral. Most geneticists now refer to them as "near neutral" or " very slightly deleterious". (The belief in neutral mutations is mostly an evolutionary belief from the past which modern science is debunking)
6days
New member
Do you mean the way God says He did it?... here are some things God says... I believe.Barbarian said:
Gen. 1:11 Their seeds produced plants and trees of the same kind.
GEN. 1:17-19 God set these lights in the sky to light the earth, to govern the day and night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And evening passed and morning came, marking the fourth day.
Gen.1:25 God made all sorts of wild animals, livestock, and small animals, each able to produce offspring of the same kind.
Gen. 2:21, 22 While the man slept, the Lord God took out one of the man’s ribs and closed up the opening. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib
EX. 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens, the earth,
Don't quote the Bible around Blablaman, he'll turn to ash.
ThisIsMyUserName
New member
Precisely. It's not written in stone and merely inspired.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/
I think you may be overestimating the quality just a bit. The very fact that the whole thing as you say was written down by so many different authors and edited by committee. Nonetheless is (unfortunately) riddled with errors and contradictions. Yup - sounds human to me.
It's funny, cause even the Muslims have a better excuse - they believe their book (which plagiarised the bible so evidently) was written down by an illiterate farm-boy.
Which side are you on?
That's an argument in favour of my position. Precisely why the literal interpretation is so laughable.
Nope. A demonstration of my point. And it seems you already know why it counts
As you know, Christians realize that the two different creation stories in Genesis are figurative. This isn't new. It was known long before modern science. Your modern revision of Genesis is just that; a modern revision.
It won't send you to hell for making it up, unless you make an idol of your new doctrine. Don't do that.
Greg Jennings
New member
Again ------ answer this question: how does having one dorsal fin help OR hurt a nurse shark survive as opposed to having two??
I'm gonna make this one real short so you can't get dodge my question
Then you'll be able to explain what the details mean. What are the firmaments if they are only figurative? Why were plants created on their day? Why did God work for six days and rest on the seventh?
And why should we accept your assertion that the story cannot mean what it plainly says? Because you stamp your foot and declare yourself in the majority?
As you know, you've got nothing.
What is the firmament?
It is the solid dome above the earth on which the sun, moon, and stars were placed.
It has the windows of heaven through which the rain and snow come.
On top of it are the storehouses of snow and water.
Of course it is figurative. We know the sky is not laid out like that.
I thought you weren't talking to me. :idunno:
If you do want to talk to me, can you not make stuff up about the Bible. :up:
If your cartoon idea was what the Bible taught, that would make it wrong, not figurative.
Incorrect. You're speaking of "the firmament of the heavens."
The "firmament," or "raqia," is the ground beneath our feet. The Hebrew word "raqqa" (verb) means:
to pound the earth (as a sign of passion); by analogy to expand (by hammering); by implication, to overlay (with thin sheets of metal):—beat, make broad, spread abroad (forth, over, out, into plates), stamp, stretch.
The "firmament of the heavens" is the sky above, including the stars in the night sky. Essentially the rest of the universe not including the earth.
Raqia is also translated "expanse" or "vault."
You may have heard of the show "The Expanse"? What's it about? Space.
6days
New member
Haha...Why not just accept God's Word for what it says? You can't seem to let Scripture stand as it is, without putting your spin on it. I think you suggested we should believe God's Word 'as it is'?
Gen. 1:11 Their seeds produced plants and trees of the same kind.
GEN. 1:17-19 God set these lights in the sky to light the earth, to govern the day and night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And evening passed and morning came, marking the fourth day.
Gen.1:25 God made all sorts of wild animals, livestock, and small animals, each able to produce offspring of the same kind.
Gen. 2:21, 22 While the man slept, the Lord God took out one of the man’s ribs and closed up the opening. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib
EX. 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens, the earth
6days
New member
You must be arguing against [MENTION=92]The Barbarian[/MENTION]? You were arguing that mutations gave the sharks an extra fin. He agreed with you. Now, you are arguing that mutations caused a loss of a fin.Greg Jennings said:
THE Biblical model is that God designed things perfectly... and that creation has now been subjected to entropy. Mutations corrupt and destroy. Some humans function fine on one kidney, but it's much better to have both working the way God designed us.
Greg... give it up... Your argument is silly, and it's false. You likely even forget why you brought up the topic of sharks fins ( you were trying to prove that there was such a thing as a neutral mutation). As you said extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and you have provided none. Even the link you provided has nothing suggesting you are correct.
Barbarian suggests:
As you know, Christians realize that the two different creation stories in Genesis are figurative. This isn't new. It was known long before modern science. Your modern revision of Genesis is just that; a modern revision.
Yep. You can't seem to let Scripture stand as it is, without putting your spin on it. Instead of reworking parables into literal history, just let them be what they are.
As you know, Christians realize that the two different creation stories in Genesis are figurative. This isn't new. It was known long before modern science. Your modern revision of Genesis is just that; a modern revision.
Yep. You can't seem to let Scripture stand as it is, without putting your spin on it. Instead of reworking parables into literal history, just let them be what they are.
Greg Jennings
New member
No you fool. We've been talking about neutral mutations. It doesn't matter if a fin is gained or lost. Save me your trite talking points and try to have a conversation. I don't appreciate you lying about me again, either. I've counted 5 that you thrown out against me in the last week. You're a bad Christian if you can't even avoid lying about an anonymous person.
I'll post the quote and link here again to prove you a liar:
"The research team is also examining the effects of radiation on other animals and plants both on the atoll and in the surrounding seas. Palumbi said nurse sharks with only one dorsal fin, instead of two, have been spotted, possible evidence of mutations caused by radiation exposure."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/455292001
For the 5th time, coward: How does having one dorsal fin as opposed to two help OR hurt a nurse shark survive?
I don’t know where you got that idea.
That stuff is in the Bible, and it is ancient Hebrew cosmology.
Haven’t you read these things in the scriptures?
That is the interpretation approach called “it’s literal or it’s a lie.”
Don’t stick with that. It makes Christians look like idiots and it turns people away from the gospel.
With that approach, you must affirm that, at the Last Supper, Jesus handed the Apostles cups of blood and His own body to eat.
If not, you are putting your own spin on God’s Words and not believing it as it is.
6days
New member
You must have a headache when the weather reporter tells you the sun will rise in the East at 7AM. Do you always have discernment problems?
6days
New member
Barbarian said:
Gen. 1:11 Their seeds produced plants and trees of the same kind.
GEN. 1:17-19 God set these lights in the sky to light the earth, to govern the day and night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And evening passed and morning came, marking the fourth day.
Gen.1:25 God made all sorts of wild animals, livestock, and small animals, each able to produce offspring of the same kind.
Gen. 2:21, 22 While the man slept, the Lord God took out one of the man’s ribs and closed up the opening. Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib
EX. 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens, the earth