Linking a Man to an animal, is a sin - how much a slave to "linking with an animal" are Evolutionists (if sinning makes you a slave)?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So this is just calling Evolution's claim that we come from monkeys out for what it is: sin. There are lots of sins, but this one is particularly popular, at the moment. I defy it as a work of the Devil! Lord, we plead your blood over what "linking with an animal" robs us of, in Your Name Amen. Now, people are going to make all sorts of excuses "its in the past" "it doesn't mean anything", but that's not good enough! Not for the Church! The sin starts with a little lie and spreads to the whole of Creation.

So how much a slave are they? Well, they will swear to your face that you "don't understand", that you "don't know how to tell, because your stupid", but the fact remains, they have ceased to care what is related to what else, deciding instead to call the whole thing an abomination of change. Abominations don't ground the soul, they make it weak and ineffectual. It's not the way of "survival". You can tolerate all sorts of impositions from the Devil, understand that predator and prey have coexistence, look forward to a time when micro-Evolution is much more advanced - but you can't swallow the lie that your existence and the existence of animals overlap.

This is how the Devil takes a foothold: he gives you a distinction (a mark, if you will) that identifies you as non-resistant to sin, then he treats you differently for a moment, then he condemns you to repeat your commitment to him and defies God that if He were God He would not have lost (a believer). The Devil will try to tell you "its not a big imposition" "you will care less in the end", but he is lying. God did not create Creation from one link to another, throughout His Creation. He carefully cared for each type, each variation on that type. God said "Go forth and multiply" not 'go forth and mingle'. There was joy in His Creation and all Creation knew that joy! There is great joy in keeping to your kind (that's what Evolutionists lose!).

The reality is, the beginning was over very quickly, compared with the length of time that led up to it - that's how God works, continual faith then suddenly a change! It is the change to come, that we look forward to, not the change we know has already been on Earth (for however long). We need to get our joy back! We need to say "get your own drawing (that is, of attention - to something specific, not something only in general, the way Evolution does), lest there not be enough for you and us both" (the way the wise virgins did - Gospels). They will burn up, as with a fever, the longer they hold on to the lie - we have to be able to diagnose the sickness.

There is power in saying "my soul's strength is more important, than my adaptation's power" We do not need to stray from obedience to God, to learn the strengths of life in Him (not just survival). Just as Jesus said "don't rejoice in having power over demons, but that your names are written in Heaven" (paraphrase, Gospels). The Evolutionists will continue to "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel" (from memory, Gospels), the more they work to make every link work together - but their foundation is a lie, so the whole thing will collapse. Let's have an alternative! Let's remember that Jesus forgives - even the sin of linking men with animals.

I hope this has been of some encouragement.

God bless.

 

[Chihuahua]

Umm, human ancestry in reverse order involves other humanoid like apes. The apes originated from common ancestors with old world monkeys, so on and so forth. There is nothing sinful about it. I think willing ignorance might be sinful.

 

[Gottservant]

Umm, human ancestry in reverse order involves other humanoid like apes. The apes originated from common ancestors with old world monkeys, so on and so forth. There is nothing sinful about it. I think willing ignorance might be sinful.

I object. Helping people be deceived is a worse sin - if that's what you're doing.

 

[Chihuahua]

I object. Helping people be deceived is a worse sin - if that's what you're doing.

You mean you disagree. I don't think you are making a formal legal protest. I agree, deceiving people by promoting scientist literacy is not only wrong, but harmful and recently increasingly lethal. For example, people brainwashed into being anti-science tend to avoid healthcare, doing self harm and harming others.

 

[Gottservant]

You are - in my opinion - without authority.

 

[rvmb]

You are - in my opinion - without authority.

You are correct GOTT and Genesis 1 makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR >>> and GOD created AFTER their/his kind.
Whoever teaches against Genesis is to be avoided like the plaque.
Sure, if someone doesn't know then say so but don't interpret Genesis to suit a devilish doctrine

 

[Chihuahua]

You are - in my opinion - without authority.

Without authority in what?

 

[Chihuahua]

You are correct GOTT and Genesis 1 makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR >>> and GOD created AFTER their/his kind.
Whoever teaches against Genesis is to be avoided like the plaque.
Sure, if someone doesn't know then say so but don't interpret Genesis to suit a devilish doctrine

No one is teaching that Genesis is false. What is problematic is when people shove disproven theories to turn something written for meaning to something it is not -a science book. It is further baffling that people become threatening and make people question their faith over nothing.

 

[The Barbarian]

So this is just calling Evolution's claim that we come from monkeys out for what it is: sin.

No, it's just a creationist superstition. Evolutionary theory doesn't say humans evolved from monkeys. Monkeys are too evolved in their own direction to have given rise to humans.

Perhaps you don't know what evolutionary theory says. Which of the 4 points of Darwinian theory do you think have been shown to be wrong?

 

[Armour of God]

The theory of evolution is flawed. In particular the claim that humans evolved from apes. It was based on a skull in the early 20th century known as piltdown man. It was found to be a fraud, an apes jaw put onto a human skull. Now they have these other fossils which they found over an area of several miles and put them together, no skull, no feet bones, but the clay sculpture animation became known as Lucy. It's just an artists wild imagination trying to support the evolution hoax theory, it has no foundation.

In addition to that there is no evidence that all that life came from one cell. A cell can replicate itself but it cannot make a new different kind of cell. That has not been demonstrated in a laboratory.

I fell for the theory of evolution. I did engineering and thought all of science had the same level of evidence and could be trusted. I was wrong and im greatful to God for opening up eyes and shinning the light on my dark path so I could get back to him

 

[Taken]

Linking a Man to an animal, is a sin - how much a slave to "linking with an animal" are Evolutionists (if sinning makes you a slave)?

Angels, Humans, Animals…
Are all distinct separate classes of Beings…
* each has their own bodily Life.
* each has a soul and is Life of Gods Breath.
* each within its OWN Class, evolves, adapts, to its environment.
* each within its OWN Class, has POWER, INSTINCTS, CHOICES.

Angels……ARE spirits.
Humans….HAVE a spirit.
Animals....NEITHER ARE a spirit or HAVE a spirit.

An Angels spirit IS his Being.
A Humans spirit IS his TRUTH in his Heart.
An Animals Being, IS his INSTINCTS.

Angels POWER is great.
… An Angel has the POWER to Appear “AS” a human.
…Angels can MIMICK human behavior.

Human POWER is limited.
…A human can bulk muscle, physical strength.
…A human can sit in a POWER Authoritative Position Over other men.
…A human can modify the outside of his body, to Appear “AS” an other human or animal or object.

…Animals POWER is primarily per each Animal, for survival, food, defense, protection, mating.
…SOME Animals can MIMICK Human Behavior.

Angels NEVER “Become” humans.
Angels that MATE with Female Humans,
Reproduce a Hybred, offspring of giant anatomy and great strength.

Humans NEVER “Become” angels.
Humans NEVER “Become” animals.
Humans that mate with Animals NEVER produce a human, animal or mixed offspring.

Animals NEVER “Become” humans.

Purporting, Advocating, Teaching…
Angels become humans…
Animals become humans…
IS A LIE.


Glory to God,
Taken

 

[The Barbarian]

The theory of evolution is flawed. In particular the claim that humans evolved from apes.

Actually, we are apes. Genetically, humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos are more closely related to each other than they are related to any other apes. But anatomy, fossil record, and other data confirms this.

It was based on a skull in the early 20th century known as piltdown man.

No. In fact, it was a major problem. You see, evolutionary theory predicted that a large brain would come after other adaptations. We don't know who faked the skull, but it was "evolutionists" who debunked it.

Now they have these other fossils which they found over an area of several miles

That's also a faked story. The actual fossil "Lucy" was all found on one site. Would you like to learn about that?

In addition to that there is no evidence that all that life came from one cell. A cell can replicate itself but it cannot make a new different kind of cell.

HeLa cells are derived from human cells, but are not entirely different. There's no embarrassment in being fooled by those stories; a lot of people presented themselves as experts when they were charlatans. But you can to a little research in the literature to come up to speed on these things.

 

[Armour of God]

Actually, we are apes. Genetically, humans, chimpanzees, and bonobos are more closely related to each other than they are related to any other apes. But anatomy, fossil record, and other data confirms this.

No. In fact, it was a major problem. You see, evolutionary theory predicted that a large brain would come after other adaptations. We don't know who faked the skull, but it was "evolutionists" who debunked it.


That's also a faked story. The actual fossil "Lucy" was all found on one site. Would you like to learn about that?

HeLa cells are derived from human cells, but are not entirely different. There's no embarrassment in being fooled by those stories; a lot of people presented themselves as experts when they were charlatans. But you can to a little research in the literature to come up to speed on these things.

You have been greatly deceived if you think humans evolved from apes. Iv done my research, it's all garbage full of hoaxes and unfounded claims

 

[Armour of God]

Actually, we are apes

Humans are not apes. We are both primates but different species

We don't know who faked the skull, but it was "evolutionists" who debunked it.

We know exactly who faked the pliltdown man skull. It was the men that presented it. This hoax was the foundation of the theory for decades and was a red flag

That's also a faked story. The actual fossil "Lucy" was all found on one site. Would you like to learn about that?

No Lucy fossils were not found together as one skeleton, the bones were found individually over several miles. There was no skull or feet bones which are important to determine between ape and human. The clay sculpture is just an artists wild imagination trying to deceivece people like yourself.

HeLa cells are derived from human cells, but are not entirely different. There's no embarrassment in being fooled by those stories; a lot of people presented themselves as experts when they were charlatans. But you can to a little research in the literature to come up to speed on these things

One cell can only replicate itself. A skin cell can only make another skin cell. That has been shown in a lab. But a cell cannot make a different cell. A skin cell cannot make brain cell. This has not been shown in a lab.

You claim to be Christians yet you've fallen for this pseudo-science. You need to do more research. I suggest you listen to Stephen Mayer, he refutes the theory of evolution from several angles

 

[The Barbarian]

Humans are not apes. We are both primates but different species

Yes, we are apes. Apes are a family of animals. We, chimps, and bonobos form a subfamily within the great ape family.

We know exactly who faked the pliltdown man skull. It was the men that presented it.

No. They were the people taken in by the hoax. Evolutionists debunked the hoax, partially, because it didn't fit the theory very well.

No Lucy fossils were not found together as one skeleton, the bones were found individually over several miles.

No, that story was a hoax. This was what was found at the site:

Notice the knee joint which was there at the original site. Now, another knee joint was found miles away:

But it was much larger, and belonged to a different individual, not Lucy. No one ever said that it was part of her skeleton. But there are still people posting false stories about the two different finds. Learn about it here:
The TRUE Story of Lucy's Knee

HeLa cells are derived from human cells, but are not entirely different. There's no embarrassment in being fooled by those stories; a lot of people presented themselves as experts when they were charlatans. But you can to a little research in the literature to come up to speed on these things.

One cell can only replicate itself.

But mutations change things, as HeLa cells changed to a different form. This is the reality.
You claim to be Christian. Remember, God is truth. A Christian should never be afraid of the truth.

 

[The Barbarian]

I suggest you listen to Stephen Mayer, he refutes the theory of evolution from several angles

Stephen Meyer? He actually believes that evolution is a fact. He merely thinks that it needs a little help from time to time, to make it work;
"Yes, he tells Rogan, he believes in “real evolutionary processes,” but he also believes in the limitation of those evolutionary processes, and he takes several minutes to unpack and explain some of the challenges the standard neo-Darwinian account of life faces today."

“Do You Believe in Evolution?” Stephen Meyer Responds to Joe Rogan

Do you believe in evolution? That’s a good question that could start a very productive conversation about the origin and development of life on Earth. But the first steps are clarifying what the word…

idthefuture.com

Meyer adheres to an old belief "intelligent design." In the 90s, it got some interest, but since it made no testable claims that were verified, most people eventually gave it up. A few IDers like Michael Denton still believe in some sort of teleology, but assert that such "design" is entirely consistent with evolution.

"it is important to emphasize at the outset that the argument presented here is entirely consistent with the basic naturalistic assumption of modern science - that the cosmos is a seamless unity which can be comprehended ultimately in its entirety by human reason and in which all phenomena, including life and evolution and the origin of man, are ultimately explicable in terms of natural processes. This is an assumption which is entirely opposed to that of the so-called "special creationist school". According to special creationism, living organisms are not natural forms, whose origin and design were built into the laws of nature from the beginning, but rather contingent forms analogous in essence to human artifacts, the result of a series of supernatural acts, involving the suspension of natural law. Contrary to the creationist position, the whole argument presented here is critically dependent on the presumption of the unbroken continuity of the organic world - that is, on the reality of organic evolution and on the presumption that all living organisms on earth are natural forms in the profoundest sense of the word, no less natural than salt crystals, atoms, waterfalls, or galaxies."
Michael Denton Nature's Destiny

 

[The Barbarian]

You have been greatly deceived if you think humans evolved from apes. Iv done my research, it's all garbage full of hoaxes and unfounded claims

That's another misconception. Humans and chimps evolved from a common ancestor that was neither a human no a chimp. That's not a finding of evolutionary theory; it's a finding of genetics. Perhaps a review of the genetic information would help you find the truth.

 

[Armour of God]

Stephen Meyer? He actually believes that evolution is a fact. He merely thinks that it needs a little help from time to time, to make it work;
"Yes, he tells Rogan, he believes in “real evolutionary processes,” but he also believes in the limitation of those evolutionary processes, and he takes several minutes to unpack and explain some of the challenges the standard neo-Darwinian account of life faces today."

Meyer believes in micro evolution but not macro evolution as Darwin describes it. He doesn't believe all life comes from one common ancestor and he doesn't believe humans evolved from apes, they are both unproven and very improbable.

Piltdown man and Lucy are both frauds made by the people that presented them and cells cannot create different cells. A skin cell cannot create a brain cell let alone the trillions of different cells required in all the life we have on earth. You are wrong about all of that.

If we came from apes then I would expect them to find plenty of transitional fossils but it's all based on only one, Lucy, and it's a fraud, a clay sculpture created by scientists eager to deceive everyone, from bones that were found over miles and put together. No skull and no foot bones which are critical to determining if it's human or ape.

For centuries atheist scientists have been trying to disprove God. In the 19th century they had a theory call "spontaneous regeneration" which said that life spawned from nothing. As soon as this was refuted they jumped onto Darwins theory of evolution. But Darwin himself admitted that the theory would collapse if fossils were found without any ancestry. That's what happens in a period known as the Cambrian explosion where new fossils were found without any ancestors. Meyer explains this in his book "Darwins doubt". But the atheist scientists have continued this lie using hoax fossils and an imaginary clay sculpture, teaching the lie to children at schools pulling them away from God.

I used to believe in the theory of evolution when I was studying engineering in university. I thought science had the answer to everything, i was an atheist.
But then I learnt that the theory of evolution was flawed. It's theoretical science and doesn't use the same high standard of evidence that engineering uses. It is full of "maybes and possibilities". It's researchers have a huge conflict of interest as well. They look for evidence to support their theory while ignoring evidence that opposes their theory.

You have been deceived my friend. You don't understand how science is supposed to work and the level of evidence it supposed to adhere to. The Cambrian explosion alone falsifies the theory let alone the fact that cells cannot make different cells and there are trillions of different cells required to make the diversity of life that we have. Plus the fact that the whole theory rested on the piltdown man hoax and now the Lucy hoax.

Furthermore i don't know how you can call yourself a Christian considering you believe these atheist lies that directly contradict the bible itself.

 

[The Barbarian]

Meyer believes in micro evolution but not macro evolution as Darwin describes it.

Darwin never used the term. He merely showed how new species evolve. In fact, Darwin used "descent with modification", not "evolution." He used the word "evolution" once in his book, a the very last sentence.

He doesn't believe all life comes from one common ancestor

Neither did Darwin, who suggested that God might have created any number of original species:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, Last Sentence of On the Origin of Species

and he doesn't believe humans evolved from apes, they are both unproven and very improbable.

Not sure if he does. But other IDers like Denton and Behe do. Because the evidence is impossible to deny.

If we came from apes then I would expect them to find plenty of transitional fossils but it's all based on only one,

You've been misled about that. There are dozens of important ones:

List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

In the 19th century they had a theory call "spontaneous regeneration" which said that life spawned from nothing. As soon as this was refuted they jumped onto Darwins theory of evolution.

That's wrong, too. As you see above, Darwin just assumed that God created the first living things. Evolution is not about how life began; it's about how living populations change over time.

But Darwin himself admitted that the theory would collapse if fossils were found without any ancestry.

No. He merely predicted that as new fossils were discovered, they would confirm his theory. And even knowledgeable YE creationists admit that this prediction was confirmed by new fossils:
Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact. It certainly CANNOT be said that traditional creation theory expected (predicted) any of these fossil finds.

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j09_2/j09_2_216-222.pdf

(It's a creationist journal, BTW)

I used to believe in the theory of evolution when I was studying engineering in university. I thought science had the answer to everything, i was an atheist.

People who don't understand science, sometimes believe things like that. It's a source of considerable confusion. One doesn't "believe in" science; one accepts or rejects it on the evidence.

But then I learnt that the theory of evolution was flawed. It's theoretical science and doesn't use the same high standard of evidence that engineering uses.

Science never proves anything. It merely gains more and more confidence as evidence accumulates. Perhaps you've heard of genetic algorithms. Engineers have learned to copy evolutionary processes to solve engineering problems too complex to be solved by design.

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/12/6782

Turns out, God knows best, after all.

That's what happens in a period known as the Cambrian explosion where new fossils were found without any ancestors.

You were misled about that,too. We have a large number of animal fossils that predate the Cambrian in the Ediacaran formation and other Precambrian fossil beds:

Ediacara fauna | Definition, Biota, and Facts | Britannica

Ediacara fauna, unique assemblage of soft-bodied organisms preserved worldwide as fossil impressions in sandstone from the Ediacaran Period (approximately 635 million to 541 million years ago). Some scientists have suggested that the Ediacara fauna were the first metazoans.

www.britannica.com

You don't understand how science is supposed to work

Before I retired, I taught scientific procedure to undergraduates.

Furthermore i don't know how you can call yourself a Christian considering you believe these atheist lies that directly contradict the bible itself.

Even Darwin attributed creation to God. And of course, nothing in the Bible rejects the observed fact of evolution. We see it happening all around us. Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is. It is not about the origin of life, or even about universal common descent. What do you think the scientific definition of biological evolution is?

 

[Armour of God]

Darwin never used the term. He merely showed how new species evolve. In fact, Darwin used "descent with modification", not "evolution." He used the word "evolution" once in his book, a the very last sentence.

Neither did Darwin, who suggested that God might have created any number of original species:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, Last Sentence of On the Origin of Species

Not sure if he does. But other IDers like Denton and Behe do. Because the evidence is impossible to deny.

You've been misled about that. There are dozens of important ones:

List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That's wrong, too. As you see above, Darwin just assumed that God created the first living things. Evolution is not about how life began; it's about how living populations change over time.

No. He merely predicted that as new fossils were discovered, they would confirm his theory. And even knowledgeable YE creationists admit that this prediction was confirmed by new fossils:
Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact. It certainly CANNOT be said that traditional creation theory expected (predicted) any of these fossil finds.

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j09_2/j09_2_216-222.pdf

(It's a creationist journal, BTW)

People who don't understand science, sometimes believe things like that. It's a source of considerable confusion. One doesn't "believe in" science; one accepts or rejects it on the evidence.

Science never proves anything. It merely gains more and more confidence as evidence accumulates. Perhaps you've heard of genetic algorithms. Engineers have learned to copy evolutionary processes to solve engineering problems too complex to be solved by design.

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/12/6782

Turns out, God knows best, after all.


You were misled about that,too. We have a large number of animal fossils that predate the Cambrian in the Ediacaran formation and other Precambrian fossil beds:

Ediacara fauna | Definition, Biota, and Facts | Britannica

Ediacara fauna, unique assemblage of soft-bodied organisms preserved worldwide as fossil impressions in sandstone from the Ediacaran Period (approximately 635 million to 541 million years ago). Some scientists have suggested that the Ediacara fauna were the first metazoans.

www.britannica.com

Before I retired, I taught scientific procedure to undergraduates.

Even Darwin attributed creation to God. And of course, nothing in the Bible rejects the observed fact of evolution. We see it happening all around us. Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is. It is not about the origin of life, or even about universal common descent. What do you think the scientific definition of biological evolution is?

You have been greatly deceived by atheist scientists on the "theory of evolution".
A lie which has pulled many away from God and continues to do so