Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scientists Question Darwinism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    ..."Woods Hole believes they have the right to insist on a belief in evolution," said David C. Gibbs III, one of Abraham's two attorneys and general counsel of the Christian Law Association in Seminole, Fla.

    "It is inconceivable that someone working in developmental biology at a major research institution would not be expected to deal intimately with evolution," she said. "A flight school hiring instructors wouldn't ask whether they accepted that the earth was spherical; they would assume it. Similarly, Woods Hole would have assumed that someone hired to work in developmental biology would accept that evolution occurred. It's part and parcel of the science these days."]
    Note the deception, how they assert that a belief in creationism is the same or similar to believing in the flat earth, and that believing the earth is round (a fact) is the same or similar to believing the lie of evolution.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by jgarden View Post
      Its no longer "creationist" after the decision by the Supreme Court, its now been changed to "intelligent design" - when the Courts rule against that conservative Christians will have to invent another synonym!


      The Christian Church went down this same road 500 years ago with Galileo
      Are you trying to assert that Galileo did not believe in God? I'm not sure what your point is here...

      - when are conservatives going to learn that debates over the mechanics (creationism vs evolution) and timelines (6 days vs 4 billion years) do not disprove the existence of God!
      Creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive.

      Are we to believe that God is incapable of employing evolution over a 4 billion year period as part of His plan?
      "Theistic evolution," as it's called, is an oxymoron, self-contradictory.

      You can't have a guided unguided process.

      Plus, God Himself says He created man AT THE BEGINNING of creation, not at the end.

      It's not a question of whether God is capable of such, but a question of DID He, and since He did not (no such thing as a "guided unguided process"), then it would be irrational to try to argue against what He DID do, which is create man at the beginning of the creation.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
        Creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive.
        Personally, I think it's more accurate to say that creationism and evolutionism are mutually exclusive. Evolutionism is what teaches an unguided process. Evolution CAN be guided, but evolutionism insists that the creature is the creator of himself.

        Ps 100:3 ...It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves...
        Last edited by Derf; February 21st, 2019, 09:32 AM.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by ok doser View Post
          guilty of what?
          Don't feed the troll who's trying to derail the thread, the topic of which is "Scientists Question Darwin".

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
            Don't feed the troll who's trying to derail the thread, the topic of which is "Scientists Question Darwin".
            my bad - he does that so often i didn't even notice what thread we're in


            i reported the post where jg took it off the rails

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by ok doser View Post
              my bad - he does that so often i didn't even notice what thread we're in


              i reported the post where jg took it off the rails
              Way ahead of you, haha

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Jonahdog View Post
                Because it does not fit with the evidence. And dont bother to ask "What evidence?" You know the evidence.
                You mean this evidence?

                No Slow and Gradual Erosion

                The fossil-bearing portion of the geologic record consists of tens of thousands of feet of sedimentary layers, of which about 4,500 feet (1,372 m) are exposed in the walls of Grand Canyon. If this enormous thickness of sediments was deposited over 500 or more million years, as conventionally believed, then some boundaries between layers should show evidence of millions of years of slow erosion, when deposition was not occurring, just as erosion is occurring on some land surfaces today.

                On the other hand, if this enormous thickness of sediments was all deposited in just over a year during the Genesis Flood, then the boundaries between the layers should show evidence of continuous rapid deposition, with only occasional rapid erosion or no erosion at all. And that’s exactly what we find, as illustrated by strata boundaries in the Grand Canyon.

                The biblical account of the Flood describes the waters sweeping over the continents to cover the whole earth. The waters flowing right around the earth would have catastrophically eroded sediments from some locations, transported them long distances, and then rapidly deposited them. Because the waters flowed “continually” (the word used in the Scriptures), erosion, transport, and deposition of sediments would have been continually rapid.

                Thus billions of dead plants and animals were rapidly buried and fossilized in sediment layers that rapidly accumulated, with only rapid or no erosion at their boundaries because they were deposited just hours, days, or weeks apart. So the evidence declares that the Genesis Flood actually happened, being a major event in the earth’s history, just as God has told us in His eyewitness account.

                Learn to read what is written.

                _____
                The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Derf View Post
                  Personally, I think it's more accurate to say that creationism and evolutionism are mutually exclusive. Evolutionism is what teaches an unguided process. Evolution CAN be guided, but evolutionism insists that the creature is the creator of himself.

                  Ps 100:3 ...It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves...
                  I appreciate the sentiment of your post, but that verse is NOT about the creation of humankind, but about the creation of Israel.

                  Psa 100:3 KJV Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
                  All of my ancestors are human.
                  Originally posted by Squeaky
                  That explains why your an idiot.
                  Originally posted by God's Truth
                  Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                  Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                  1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                  Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                    It's true that there are many good and worthy Christians who are YE creationists, and while Biologos is in concert with the great majority of the world's Christians, they don't reflect the views of all of them.



                    They merely accept His word as they understand it. Just like you.
                    They merely accept the current scientific theories, too, of which I am skeptical of some. To put current scientific theories on the level of the bible is not a Christian position, however many Christians may hold it.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Derf View Post
                      They merely accept the current scientific theories, too, of which I am skeptical of some.
                      To put current scientific theories on the level of the bible is not a Christian position, however many Christians may hold it.[/QUOTE]

                      Yep. You won't go to hell for being a creationist or for accepting evolution. It's just not a salvation issue. Unless you make one of them an idol and demand that all Christians must believe it your way. That could put your salvation in danger.
                      This message is hidden because ...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                        Yep. You won't go to hell for being a creationist or for accepting evolution. It's just not a salvation issue. Unless you make one of them an idol and demand that all Christians must believe it your way. That could put your salvation in danger.
                        Your argument is that you can believe that Jesus is a liar without it affecting your salvation?

                        Mark 10:6
                        6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

                        Learn to read what is written.

                        _____
                        The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                        ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
                          “I think more scientists are realizing the limitations to Darwinism, specifically in regard to the origin of life and the complexity of the cell. So much of how cells actually work reveal how impossible it is that life arose from mutation and natural selection. As we have learned more and more about molecular and cellular biology, more scientists doubt Darwinism although they may not admit it for fear of repercussions.”

                          The theory of Charles Darwin severely damaged the idea that the Bible should be understood in a literal manner in the eyes of many people but now more and more scientists are questioning Darwin's theory:

                          https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...nism-statement
                          This TOL thread has a lot more information about the scientists that question Darwinism.
                          Real Science Radio's List of Scientists Doubting Darwin
                          Learn to read what is written.

                          _____
                          The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                          ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
                            Your argument is that you can believe that Jesus is a liar without it affecting your salvation?

                            Mark 10:6
                            6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
                            Well, let's see what God says was there in the beginning of creation...

                            Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. 2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

                            Your argument is that you think you can call God a liar without affecting your salvation?

                            You've deluded yourself here. Neither God the father nor Jesus are lying. If you think about it a while, you can probably figure out how. Give it some time and let me know.
                            This message is hidden because ...

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                              Well, let's see what God says was there in the beginning of creation...

                              Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created heaven, and earth. 2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

                              Your argument is that you think you can call God a liar without affecting your salvation?
                              I believe Genesis 1:1.
                              What makes you think God lied in Genesis 1:1?

                              Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                              Neither God the father nor Jesus are lying.
                              I know that, which is why I am a Young Earth Creationist.

                              If you are not a Young Earth Creationists, you have to reject what God the Father and Jesus said about creation.
                              Learn to read what is written.

                              _____
                              The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                              ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                                St. Paul says it's conditional on continuing in the faith. I think he's right. What do you think?
                                Paul was employing a first class condition:

                                "The first class condition indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument. The normal idea, then, is if--and let us assume that this is true for the sake of argument--then...."
                                (Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 690).

                                The believer can never lose his salvation and perish:

                                "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life"
                                (Jn.3:16).

                                Do you really think that those have received the truth in power and in the Holy Spirit can ever stop believeing?:

                                "The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; For the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever"
                                (2 Jn.1-2).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X