Eight objections to evolution

[Armour of God]

that picture is ugly . Looks like it was born so hungry it swallowed its own head
and then vomited it back up digested . Its hideous . Remove that nasty looking thing from the site as well as
SIGHT of all eyes . LoL .

His resorted to personal attack and slander.
I feel like doing the same back to him but with the help of the Holy Spirit I will not stoop to that level. I still love the brother dispute our disagreement, his slander and personal attack on me

 

[Grailhunter]

Intelligent design rejects theory of evolution

View attachment 89504

Your belief is a mix of intelligent design and theory of evolution. You even admit that your beliefs have been mixed in a blender.

Now you've resorted to personal attack and disrespectful slander which is dispicable and abominable to say the least, and reflects your true character.

Despite our disagreement and your personal attack and slander I still have much love for you and will not stoop to that level of disgust

God have mercy on you my brother

Post 178

 

[Armour of God]

Post 178

My dear friend
You've resorted to personal attack and slander.
God have mercy upon you

 

[Armour of God]

Post 178

My brother.
Please refrain from resorting to slander and posting disgusting imagery.
There is no need to stoop to that level.
I have always show you respect and I would appreciate it if you did the same.

You said
"I mixed my beliefs in a blender"
I agree

Then you said
"My beliefs include God, intelligent design, and evolution"
I agree
That's exactly what I said. It's a mix

ID rejects TOE.
You would know this if you understood ID.
I've proven it with videos and google explanation. You have shown nothing to prove otherwise.

Your belief is a mix of TOE and ID.
You said it yourself.

 

[Armour of God]

I mixed my beliefs in a blender last weekend....My beliefs include God, intelligent design, and evolution

I agree

 

[Debp]

I mixed my beliefs in a blender last weekend

You certainly have...but I think you have had these beliefs for some time so are unwilling to listen to the scientists that explain Intelligent Design in the videos @Armour of God and myself have posted.

You have also said that you don't believe God's Word is inerrant. So it's like you are saying "did God really say that?" That is getting onto dangerous ground. Like when the devil deceived Eve.

 

[Armour of God]

You certainly have...but I think you have had these beliefs for some time so are unwilling to listen to the scientists that explain Intelligent Design in the videos @Armour of God and myself have posted.

You have also said that you don't believe God's Word is inerrant. So it's like you are saying "did God really say that?" That is getting onto dangerous ground. Like when the devil deceived Eve.

Evolutionists often point to the fossil record as evidence of evolution.

This 10 minute video focuses on the fossils that evolutionists claim to be transitional from apes to humans and explains why they are just assumptions.

 

[amigo de christo]

You certainly have...but I think you have had these beliefs for some time so are unwilling to listen to the scientists that explain Intelligent Design in the videos @Armour of God and myself have posted.

You have also said that you don't believe God's Word is inerrant. So it's like you are saying "did God really say that?" That is getting onto dangerous ground. Like when the devil deceived Eve.

Yes my friend that is deadly deadly dangerous ground indeed .
But it has been the way of wolves throughout the ages . HAS GOD really said
and then they twist it to mean a lie . Its now in this late and last hour
that we see the leaven growing wild . For under the judge not , under the seeker friendly
SIN and error was not allowed to be corrected and all under the guise that to correct it was being NON LOVING
and JUDGMENTAL .
Remember when i said that satan can say GOD IS LOVE
well he can also quoate the Judge not and be taking THAT OUT of text , as HE DOES ALL THINGS , to imply a lie .
And now a word .
Let the grave men warn . let them warn and silence not their lips for and by means of a false sensual love and its judge not .
Cause i think by now some of us can see real clearly where it led too .
A MASSIVE UPRISING in LEAVEN that has led them by means of this love INTO the greatest rebellion against
God . As they cast HIS words behind them , hollering hate speech , and crying GOD is love .
I THINK we both KNOW GOD IS LOVE , but since when DID THE LOVE OF GOD cast TRUTH OUT for a lie .

 

[Jericho]

This argument is my pet peeve.

Why would we dismiss the entire Bible if we dismissed one book? If we dismissed... Esther... or Obadiah... you wouldn't say we have to get rid of the whole Bible. The same is true for Genesis.

Do all the other books rely on Genesis? NO. I know you want to say yes to that, but NO. Every other major doctrine can be observed in the other books.

I disagree. Esther and Obadiah, while important in their own right, are not foundational like Genesis is. Genesis explains the fall of humanity and sets the stage for the gospels. Without it, we wouldn't understand the nature of sin and why we would even need a redeemer in the first place.

 

[Wick Stick]

I disagree. Esther and Obadiah, while important in their own right, are not foundational like Genesis is. Genesis explains the fall of humanity and sets the stage for the gospels. Without it, we wouldn't understand the nature of sin and why we would even need a redeemer in the first place.

Yes, we would still understand sin. Paul already tells us "all have sinned" and talks about the "first Adam" and "last Adam." He also covers God's covenant with Abraham. Psalms and Job have the creation story.

Again, there's no doctrine in Genesis that doesn't also appear elsewhere in the Bible.

 

[Jericho]

Again, there's no doctrine in Genesis that doesn't also appear elsewhere in the Bible.

And yet, if Genesis didn't exist, the doctrine in those books wouldn't exist either.

 

[Wick Stick]

And yet, if Genesis didn't exist, the doctrine in those books wouldn't exist either.

Nope. Genesis isn't the only source of information on... anything. Name a doctrine in Genesis and I can show it you elsewhere.

 

[Jericho]

Nope. Genesis isn't the only source of information on... anything. Name a doctrine in Genesis and I can show it you elsewhere.

What, exactly, do you have against Genesis? Those doctrines didn't appear in a vacuum, they only exist because it was in Genesis first.

 

[Wick Stick]

What, exactly, do you have against Genesis?

My quarrel is with those in the church who misinterpret it to prop up bad theology.

For instance, denying burials to stillborn children for a 1000 years, because Augustine interpreted the story of Adam to mean that babies are born in a state of guilt and go to hell.

In this conversation, insistence that if Genesis is not infallible, entirely literal, and chronologically ordered, the entire Bible should be thrown away. That's just ridiculous hyperbole.

Those doctrines didn't appear in a vacuum, they only exist because it was in Genesis first.

Genesis is a compilation of older material. Everything in Genesis was in other writings before Genesis existed.

I think people assume that because Genesis refers to the earliest things that it's the earliest book. It isn't. It seems to have been put together from other sources somewhat later than the other books of Moses.

For instance, Sabbath observance is in Genesis 1. But Deuteronomy also has Sabbath observance, and exists before Genesis.

 

[Grailhunter]

My quarrel is with those in the church who misinterpret it to prop up bad theology.

For instance, denying burials to stillborn children for a 1000 years, because Augustine interpreted the story of Adam to mean that babies are born in a state of guilt and go to hell.

In this conversation, insistence that if Genesis is not infallible, entirely literal, and chronologically ordered, the entire Bible should be thrown away. That's just ridiculous hyperbole.

Genesis is a compilation of older material. Everything in Genesis was in other writings before Genesis existed.

I think people assume that because Genesis refers to the earliest things that it's the earliest book. It isn't. It seems to have been put together from other sources somewhat later than the other books of Moses.

For instance, Sabbath observance is in Genesis 1. But Deuteronomy also has Sabbath observance, and exists before Genesis.

It appears and scholars contend that Moses or his scribe wrote from their time backwards from oral tradition. At that time there were probably a few creation accounts and as it was two were popular and the decision was made to keep them both.
And yes, the doctrine of Original Sin is one of two very popular false beliefs.

 

[Wick Stick]

It appears and scholars contend that Moses or his scribe wrote from their time backwards from oral tradition. At that time there were probably a few creation accounts and as it was two were popular and the decision was made to keep them both.

Since the 18th century, scholars have come up with a number of theories to explain why Genesis repeats many of its stories, why most of the patriarchs have 2 different names, and why God Himself is referred to variously as LORD, God, or LORD God.

One such theory, which I find compelling, is called the Kenite Hypothesis. The Kenite hypothesis notes that Moses' father-in-law was a priest from the tribe of Kenites, and that the Kenites clans are listed as scribes in the Bible. Based on those two things, it makes the hypothesis that Moses inherited a bunch of scrolls from his father-in-law.

Since the Kenites are descendants of Esau, much of their history duplicates Israel's, and so we end up with the same stories told twice, and slightly different names because of a divergence in languages.

It's probably worth noting that Moses probably didn't write Genesis, so much as he curated a collection of scrolls which he passed down to the Levites. At some point, someone decided to put everything in one scroll, and when they did they set them in chronological order. The chronological order sometimes makes things a little weird, as each original scroll doesn't always naturally connect to one that comes before/after it chronologically.

 

[Grailhunter]

Since the 18th century, scholars have come up with a number of theories to explain why Genesis repeats many of its stories, why most of the patriarchs have 2 different names, and why God Himself is referred to variously as LORD, God, or LORD God.

One such theory, which I find compelling, is called the Kenite Hypothesis. The Kenite hypothesis notes that Moses' father-in-law was a priest from the tribe of Kenites, and that the Kenites clans are listed as scribes in the Bible. Based on those two things, it makes the hypothesis that Moses inherited a bunch of scrolls from his father-in-law.

Since the Kenites are descendants of Esau, much of their history duplicates Israel's, and so we end up with the same stories told twice, and slightly different names because of a divergence in languages.

It's probably worth noting that Moses probably didn't write Genesis, so much as he curated a collection of scrolls which he passed down to the Levites. At some point, someone decided to put everything in one scroll, and when they did they set them in chronological order. The chronological order sometimes makes things a little weird, as each original scroll doesn't always naturally connect to one that comes before/after it chronologically.

Right.

 

[Debp]

12Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. 13But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:12-17

 

[Wrangler]

But when I looked into it more I found that it was flawed. Its not real science that is observable or testable. Its more like a philosophy. A bunch of assumptions put together by atheists eager to disprove God.

The religion of evolution is rooted in the sacrament of LONG TIME. It’s their answer to everything. Except even that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny with entropy as @Jericho pointed out in the OP, and as @marks pointed out, irreducible complexity and most damning if all, informational content in DNA.

 

[Wrangler]

Quantum-Mechanics and Computer Science and Nuclear Weapons for 24 years. Life long formal education.
I do believe in God I just do not think the world is flat or just 8,000 years old.
The scriptures are a great place for religion not a good source on how to do brain surgery or cosmology.

Have you watched the vids that @Armour of God provided?

Your hostility to a position that is not your own. reliance on personal attacks and hubris in your own understanding does not make a good witness for Christ. Imagine for a moment the Bible is correct about the world being 6,000 years old ….