Evolution and Clothes

[Stranger]

i might ask the same thing; after all, it is you who brought up "sin," Original Sin, wadr. And the fur issue is pretty much settled, right. You want another pitcher?

'Sin' was in answer to your question.

My point was and is that in the so called evolution of man, the loss of fur does not make since. Because it is much more effectual than mans skin. In other words, 'clothes' are proof that man did not evolve.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

'Sin' was in answer to your question.

Sure funny though, innit, that God did not see fit to lead with that, but rather "Who told you that you were naked?"

So i'd like to suggest to you that sin has been misrepresented to you, on purpose, and that your definition of sin is not even supported by Scripture, with all due respect.

My point was and is that in the so called evolution of man, the loss of fur does not make since. Because it is much more effectual than mans skin. In other words, 'clothes' are proof that man did not evolve.

and i am arguing that if you begin with a conclusion, you cannot possibly be led to any change of mind, because you have reached a conclusion, by definition, you "know," now, and entire books on the matter, that being the one about documented traits that are no longer useful for survival atrophying, and becoming recessive, so that we only occasionally get furry humans and bearded women now, cannot possibly be regarded in an unbiased light.

 

[Stranger]

Sure funny though, innit, that God did not see fit to lead with that, but rather "Who told you that you were naked?"

So i'd like to suggest to you that sin has been misrepresented to you, on purpose, and that your definition of sin is not even supported by Scripture, with all due respect.

and i am arguing that if you begin with a conclusion, you cannot possibly be led to any change of mind, because you have reached a conclusion, by definition, you "know," now, and entire books on the matter, that being the one about documented traits that are no longer useful for survival atrophying, and becoming recessive, so that we only occasionally get furry humans and bearded women now, cannot possibly be regarded in an unbiased light.

You can suggest whatever you like. But you never offer any substance to your objection than just you. That's 'sure funny'.

Stranger

 

[Dcopymope]

To any evolutionists who are here;

If evolution were true, and animals changed and adapted according to survival in the elements, why would they leave their fur and feathers, which provide much better for them then the bare skin of man?

And, where did the shame come from in being naked in front of others? Animals don't have it.

Stranger

I think your question, and anybody else's with a similar question can be boiled down to this: "If evolution is true, then why are humans such weaklings in almost every single way minus intelligence to their supposed animal common ancestry?"

That one question just about disproves any notion of us evolving from a damn thing doesn't it?

 

[bbyrd009]

thing is, when Denisovan and Neandertal dna can be found in you, you have to ask yourself
'At what point am i channeling the RCC, putting people to death for suggesting that the earth revolves around the sun?'

 

[Stranger]

thing is, when Denisovan and Neandertal dna can be found in you, you have to ask yourself
'At what point am i channeling the RCC, putting people to death for suggesting that the earth revolves around the sun?'

Prove your statement. What is your source?

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

Prove your statement. What is your source?

Stranger

sorry, source for which?

 

[bbyrd009]

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=denisovan%20and%20neanderthal%20dna

 

[Stranger]

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=denisovan%20and%20neanderthal%20dna

Explain how this proves your statement.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

Explain how this proves your statement.

Stranger

well i would start by saying that i am not trying to prove anything, Stranger. I mean, i can't prove that the earth revolves around the sun, either ok. But we...what thread am i on...ok, but we have pretty compelling evidence here of "evolution" operating on some level, even if it is not to the extent that i see Darwin is here being accused of perpetrating, which he in fact fought against before his death, and even went so far as to apologize for the theory, because he did not envision it being abused to try and disprove God. And that is only if the reality that your ancestors lived in caves and sat on rocks, while you live in a miracle, and just advocate for keeping everyone else who does not march in lockstep with you bombed back into the stone age, as we have done in Libya and countless other nations, and are just about done doing to Syria, to the point that your masters are now drilling for oil there, Genie Petroleum i think it is, or some other name that invokes "magic"--of course--you might want to go buy some stock, even though they are breaking every law on the planet, but that doesn't matter since your dog is still the biggest on the block. for now, and you can justify it by mouthing "they are all lost" like a zombie, and get 51% of your democracy to agree.

You need me to "prove" any of this, Strange? Let me know, k?

 

[bbyrd009]

22You are blessed when people hate you,
when they exclude you,x insult you,
and slander your name as evily
because of the Son of Man.z
23“Rejoice in that day and leap for joy! Take note — your reward is great in heaven, for this is the way their ancestors used to treat the prophets.aa
Woe to the Self-Satisfied
24But woe to you who are rich,
for you have received your comfort.
25Woe to you who are now full,
for you will be hungry.
Woe to youab who are now laughing,
for you will mourn and weep.
26Woe to youac
when all people speak well of you,
for this is the way their ancestors
used to treat the false prophets.

so, tell me some more about how you are not sorry, and you don't need forgiveness ok.
wanna see a pitcher of your cedar, that has been planted where the fig tree was?
do you need a quote from your king, who openly rejects God, as your brethren place hands of
protection "against concentrated satanic attack" upon him? What is to be done with you, Stranger?

Your reaping is sure; would you slit your grandchildren's throats now, too?

 

[Stranger]

well i would start by saying that i am not trying to prove anything, Stranger. I mean, i can't prove that the earth revolves around the sun, either ok. But we...what thread am i on...ok, but we have pretty compelling evidence here of "evolution" operating on some level, even if it is not to the extent that i see Darwin is here being accused of perpetrating, which he in fact fought against before his death, and even went so far as to apologize for the theory, because he did not envision it being abused to try and disprove God. And that is only if the reality that your ancestors lived in caves and sat on rocks, while you live in a miracle, and just advocate for keeping everyone else who does not march in lockstep with you bombed back into the stone age, as we have done in Libya and countless other nations, and are just about done doing to Syria, to the point that your masters are now drilling for oil there, Genie Petroleum i think it is, or some other name that invokes "magic"--of course--you might want to go buy some stock, even though they are breaking every law on the planet, but that doesn't matter since your dog is still the biggest on the block. for now, and you can justify it by mouthing "they are all lost" like a zombie, and get 51% of your democracy to agree.

You need me to "prove" any of this, Strange? Let me know, k?

You said in your reply #25 that Neanderthal DNA is found in us. So, prove that is true and how that proves evolution. In other words, give some explanation.

The lie of evolution is against God because it goes against the book of Genesis.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

gimme a break Stranger, how am i supposed to "prove" that we have Neanderthal DNA lol. You have like over 1000 different DNAs in you, if your gut is in good shape. Which, if you are an American, it's prolly a train wreck there, too, but at least 500 or something. It's a theory, i grant you that. And scientists are sometimes just big whores, too ok. Tbh it wouldn't surprise me if our beginnings stayed obscure, and undecided, but this "evolution goes against God, because we can read right here in our MYTHOLOGY that God created Adam in like an afternoon, one day between lunch and dinner" stuff is kind of short-sighted, too, it seems to me. So, to combat evolution, you end up denying that Genesis is mythology, which even Theologists don't do, and insist that Moses got all of the Decalogue from God on a mountain, when we know about Hammurabi, and have much less disputable evidence of the last five of the Decalogue predating Moses by 10,000 years, which even the RCC admits...

Moral Aspect of Divine Law - Encyclopedia Volume - Catholic ...

www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6921

Although the substance of the Decalogue is thus both of natural and Divine law, yet ... more advanced Code of Hammurabi and other celebrated codes of ancient law. ..

so, in trying to enforce your reading of a perfectly good, mythological story, which preserved truth for future generations, you end up reading like a child, reading a Book meant to impart spiritual truth like it was an auto repair manual or something, because you have a preconceived conclusion that you must make the story fit. When Scripture plainly cautions one not to get too decided about human theories.

So yes, once you have decided exactly how i must read Genesis, for me, tyvm, evolution might be read to "go against the Book of Genesis," ok; or, It very well might not, and there might be a perfectly valid reading of Genesis, that some notice of evolution might tail with just fine, the dust of the earth might easily be something like this View attachment 424, and it is possible to actually read the rest of the Bible as...well, exactly what It purports Itself to be, a spiritual guide, without going all Fundamental and ending up equal to an Atheist in your arguing.

No one knows, ok, and your interpretation of your god, the Bible, is not the Final Word, especially when you are mute at the realization that the Book is not the Word anyway. I don't know, and you don't either. And the fact that you are so convinced that you know, anything, is just kind of an indication that maybe you are seven times worse off than you were, wadr.

So, if you ever decide that there is something that you are not absolutely sure about, let me know, ok, because i come here to try and find agreement with people that i am at odds with; and i have realized that in order to do that, the first thing i have to do is give that thing up.

Seen the little kids arguing over whether it's "sprinkling" or "raining?" It's hilarious
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tbln4TdtTI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tbln4TdtTI


hope one of those comes through. Have a good day.

 

[Stranger]

bbyrd009

That's right. Your DNA and the Neanderthal is nothing but a theory. Evolution is nothing but something to believe other than God.

The Bible is nothing but mythology to you. To we who are Christian, it is the Word of God. And the Bible purports itself to be that. You just don't believe it.

Wrong. We who are Christian know the Bible is the Word of God. We know.

Sorry, but we believed God long before the lie of evolution came along.

You and I will find no agreement, unless you change your views.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

Hey, i understand. I believed the Book was God for 40 years. The evolution thing completely does not matter to me, Stranger. I don't know where i came from, and i don't know where i am going. I just meant to offer an opinion that reconciles evolution with God, and suggests a more spiritual way to read a Book that is, after all, God~Breathed, and must be about Spirit. So, i recognize that evolution has an atheist symbology to many seekers, to whom dust cannot be anything other than literal soil, even though they are reading that from a Book that assures them that they are on a spiritual journey, and many spiritual reflections for "soil" are given in It.

And i see that "we who are Christian" is a chimera, that does not exist in the sense that you want to suggest that it does--even though it is a popular opinion, don't get me wrong--and actually is just a way to make me a "them," see, now i am dismissed, as a Christian, by you, i have been judged now, and condemned. "We who are Christian" is a way to say "I am God, and you are not," that can be proven by asking the Christians in the congregation across the street from your congregation, who do not agree with you on some point or other, who the "real" Christians are. See? See, and don't see, we both know what the scenario that ensues from that looks like. We are as divided as Sunni and Shia, moreso, actually, because they still have family, whereas ours is completely destroyed now, so we are completely divided, as evidenced by the knife you just stuck so casually in my heart, which don't get me wrong, i'm a great murderer myself.

And we have several chimeras now, things made up of two or more premises, that might be fine on their own, even, but then conclusions are drawn from these, that then also become premises, starting points, assumptions, things that we do not even question, like "the Bible is the Word," and so a veil is drawn over our eyes, scales grow on them, and we don't even question these conclusions now, because of course they have now become premises, and all of the "proof" in the world will not convince you that the Bible is not God now, and that the Word is, see, it would not matter if God Himself came down now and told you that Word requires Breath, whereas words can be scribed, and drift all by themselves even, tares are now "weeds," so we can pull them.

So then, "we" will find no agreement, unless "i" change my views.

Ok, i agree. How bout--whose thread are we tromping all over now...ok--how bout you briefly tell me, one at a time, what views that i need to change?
(And can we just agree that we are talking about "beliefs" here?)

We might start with this "the Bible is God," since that seems to be the one presenting itself, it is the one you "know," but if you see a better starting point, some view that i need to change first, then i'll follow your lead there.

 

[Stranger]

Hey, i understand. I believed the Book was God for 40 years. The evolution thing completely does not matter to me, Stranger. I don't know where i came from, and i don't know where i am going. I just meant to offer an opinion that reconciles evolution with God, and suggests a more spiritual way to read a Book that is, after all, God~Breathed, and must be about Spirit. So, i recognize that evolution has an atheist symbology to many seekers, to whom dust cannot be anything other than literal soil, even though they are reading that from a Book that assures them that they are on a spiritual journey, and many spiritual reflections for "soil" are given in It.

And i see that "we who are Christian" is a chimera, that does not exist in the sense that you want to suggest that it does--even though it is a popular opinion, don't get me wrong--and actually is just a way to make me a "them," see, now i am dismissed, as a Christian, by you, i have been judged now, and condemned. "We who are Christian" is a way to say "I am God, and you are not," that can be proven by asking the Christians in the congregation across the street from your congregation, who do not agree with you on some point or other, who the "real" Christians are. See? See, and don't see, we both know what the scenario that ensues from that looks like. We are as divided as Sunni and Shia, moreso, actually, because they still have family, whereas ours is completely destroyed now, so we are completely divided, as evidenced by the knife you just stuck so casually in my heart, which don't get me wrong, i'm a great murderer myself.

And we have several chimeras now, things made up of two or more premises, that might be fine on their own, even, but then conclusions are drawn from these, that then also become premises, starting points, assumptions, things that we do not even question, like "the Bible is the Word," and so a veil is drawn over our eyes, scales grow on them, and we don't even question these conclusions now, because of course they have now become premises, and all of the "proof" in the world will not convince you that the Bible is not God now, and that the Word is, see, it would not matter if God Himself came down now and told you that Word requires Breath, whereas words can be scribed, and drift all by themselves even, tares are now "weeds," so we can pull them.

So then, "we" will find no agreement, unless "i" change my views.

Ok, i agree. How bout--whose thread are we tromping all over now...ok--how bout you briefly tell me, one at a time, what views that i need to change?
(And can we just agree that we are talking about "beliefs" here?)

We might start with this "the Bible is God," since that seems to be the one presenting itself, it is the one you "know," but if you see a better starting point, some view that i need to change first, then i'll follow your lead there.

That you don't know where you came from or where you are going is understood already. Because, you keep up this false belief that Christians think the Bible is God.

You were dismissed as a Christian by me long before this last post of yours. When I say 'we who are Christian', I make a distinction between those who are Christian and those who are not. Just as God does. Casually? I don't think so.

Yes, the Bible is the Word of God. That is without question. "It is written"

I don't need to tell you what views you need to change. You need to get right with Jesus Christ and then you will naturally have the correct views.

I never said the Bible is God. You did. And do. I just said the Bible is the written Word of God.

You don't understand. I don't care if you follow my lead. You need to follow Jesus Christ.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

That you don't know where you came from or where you are going is understood already. Because, you keep up this false belief that Christians think the Bible is God.

man, Word was God + Bible is Word = Bible is God, i just don't know how to put it any plainer

You were dismissed as a Christian by me long before this last post of yours. When I say 'we who are Christian', I make a distinction between those who are Christian and those who are not. Just as God does. Casually? I don't think so.

it is you who will reap what you sow

 

[bbyrd009]

Yes, the Bible is the Word of God. That is without question. "It is written"

then your definition of "Word" is different than mine. Fine

 

[bbyrd009]

I don't need to tell you what views you need to change. You need to get right with Jesus Christ and then you will naturally have the correct views.

ya, if only. that is a wide path, bro.

See that this is a chimers made of the doctrine that you have been convinced is true, and your desire to be right, to be God.
See, you are making the decisions now; you are naturally right, since you love Jesus and you know what that Passage means

 

[bbyrd009]

I never said the Bible is God. You did. And do. I just said the Bible is the written Word of God.

sorry, there is no "written Word." The Book is God~Breathed. Word is Breath, and written is not Word. God is Word. Christ is Word. The Gospel is Word, and the Truth is Word, but the Bible is not the Word, which also cannot be like added to like that, "_______ Word," or "Word _______," you can't do that, either, wadr

"Patriotic Christian" is bad enough