Mitth'raw'nuruodo Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 "Evolution as a concept is completely compatible with the Bible." No it most certainly does NOT! In the Bible it CLEARLY says that God created everything, and he saw that it was PERFECT. This leaves no room for evolution. some things adapt and change, but they NEVER "evolve." The reason that people lived so long in Bible days is simple. Before the flood there was no such thing as rain. All the water was forming a shield if you will, around the atmosphere. There was increased air pressure and double the oxygen we have now. Scientists have taken bubbles of air preserved in sap, and confirmed this. With double the air pressure and double the oxygen, along with a shield of water to prevent harmful radiation, people were easily able to live to 900 years of age. Next thing, which is more likely in terms of chance? Creationism 1. There is a God who can do as he pleases with the universe. Evolutionism 1. Big bang made the universe. 2. Spark near primordial goo made a unicellular organism. 3-800,000. Unicellular organism evolved into everything. Any other questions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 Originally posted by Mitth'raw'nuruodo "Evolution as a concept is completely compatible with the Bible." No it most certainly does NOT! In the Bible it CLEARLY says that God created everything, and he saw that it was PERFECT. This leaves no room for evolution. some things adapt and change, but they NEVER "evolve." The reason that people lived so long in Bible days is simple. Before the flood there was no such thing as rain. All the water was forming a shield if you will, around the atmosphere. There was increased air pressure and double the oxygen we have now. Scientists have taken bubbles of air preserved in sap, and confirmed this. With double the air pressure and double the oxygen, along with a shield of water to prevent harmful radiation, people were easily able to live to 900 years of age. Next thing, which is more likely in terms of chance? Creationism 1. There is a God who can do as he pleases with the universe. Evolutionism 1. Big bang made the universe. 2. Spark near primordial goo made a unicellular organism. 3-800,000. Unicellular organism evolved into everything. Any other questions? Hey Thrawn, great minds think alike. If you read this thread in it's entirety, you will see that I already addressed the Water layer above the atmosphere allowing for longer lifespans issue as well as some other nifty archeological findings that give creedance to events that took place in the Bible, perhaps you should read this whole thread next time Oh and Thrawn, I agree with you on all your points. However, you may want to tone down your response. We're trying to keep this thread very civil, and there are a few who would love to jump at the chance to step this up to a flame war. Your posts came across as very "all-knowing" and "authoratative". be careful my friend... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitth'raw'nuruodo Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 Sorry, I got bored with reading about 5 pages in, and just went to the last page. *Walks over to volume controls, and tones them down* There, that should help you out. Appologies go to everyone that thinks I'm being too "all-knowing." I know that I'm not all-knowing, it just makes me angry when I see people waving around these wild theories as if they were proven fact! Take evolution for example! (Here I go again, this time with less tone ) Everyone says, "It's been PROVEN! They have the skulls that are between human and monkey!" Well, there is a kid at my school that could pass for a monkey anyday, and I'm sure that he has a very bizzare skull. And the things they're talking about are not "evolution," some are probably mutations (yes there are such things as mutations), and others are just variations in species. You know when they first said that the earth was billions of years old, one of their main supporting pieces of evidence was that there is coal in the earth and everyone knows that coal takes millions of years to form. Well today, we can make coal in a lab in twenty minutes. All in all, I'm not condemning anyone. I'm simply saying that there is alot of evidence out there that is misinterpretted by people. So please be careful in what you believe. P.S. Havoc, did you know the part about the double oxygen and double pressure? (I learned about that at a conference I went to. It was really cool. It was all about the pre-flood world) P.S.S. I'm a Christian, by the way, and that's probably one of the reasons I feel so strongly against evolution. But all of my arguments make good points, don't they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duder Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 I think as someone wisely pointed out before it takes faith to go with religion or with science. Neither is proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 Actually, the Big Bang AND evolution has been proven, so there. But then acgain, some Biblical stuff has been found by archeologists, at liest in Indiana Jones anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 Originally posted by Mitth'raw'nuruodo P.S. Havoc, did you know the part about the double oxygen and double pressure? (I learned about that at a conference I went to. It was really cool. It was all about the pre-flood world) Yes I did,and I find it fascinating. Personally, it pretty much sealed it for me. That theory singlehandedly made the great flood and the book genesis very plausible, and I accepted the rest on faith. Good work, Thrawn, I commend you on your diligence and perseverance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 Originally posted by Crazy_dog no.3 Actually, the Big Bang AND evolution has been proven, so there. But then acgain, some Biblical stuff has been found by archeologists, at liest in Indiana Jones anyways. Last I knew though, the Big Bang was still referred to as the Big Bang Theory, not the Big Bang Law. If it was proven, it no longer a theory, but now a Law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duder Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 It is actually theory. As for the posts by Thrawn and stryphe, the problem I am having here is that all your language is scientific. Surely these things could have happened for scientific reasons??!! Why does go towards proving that God created the world? Educate me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Havoc Stryphe Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 Originally posted by duder It is actually theory. As for the posts by Thrawn and stryphe, the problem I am having here is that all your language is scientific. Surely these things could have happened for scientific reasons??!! Why does go towards proving that God created the world? Educate me! ok, just a start, but you have to work with me on this, ok? If God did indeed create the world then science would actually reflect this, correct? Well, the theory that a Layer of Water existed above the Earth's atmosphere would scientifically explain why the Earth had a humid, Jungle climate, why creatures were on average larger than now. But it would also scientifically allow for human beings to live longer lifespans, like moses was said to live 900 yrs and others in the Bible who lived well into their 600's and 700's. But to explain where that layer of water went from then to now would lend great creedance to a Great Flood scenario. That this Layer collapsed on the Earth flooding the Earth. Again showing the Bible to be credible as far as events and timetables are concerned. Where did the water layer come from? well if the Bible already seems credible as to the Great Flood happening than this wouldn't be much more of a stretch: God seperated the waters from the waters and formed dry ground. Meaning he lifted some water from the majority of water so that dry ground could be formed, this extra water was placed above the atmosphere surrounding the Earth. And later God brought this layer of water down as the Great Flood to destroy the World for it's great wickedness. That the Layer was there, seems scientifically sound, that the layer is not there now is obvious. That the Bible points to situations that could have only existed due to that Layer of Water existing (i.e. Lifespans of 600 yrs!) gives evidence that the Layer did exist. So now we must figure out where it went. Again the Bible gives an answer that seems logical and scientifically sound, that it fell to the Earth, flooding the Earth. Which would now explain were dinosaurs went (killed in flood), which give headway for an ice age or 2 (getting rid of the humid, jungle climate)and making Lifespans in the 60 -100 yrs. Again, logical and scientifically sound. Wether God, placed that layer there and then later brought it down on the Earth, well that takes faith to believe, but since the Bible already seems to have sound priciples of events, why not take it's word on spiritual matter s as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain_drake Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 you know we could sit here for years and just keep saying the same things over and over although i'm a christin my mind is open but to me god just sounds more resanoble 1. if the big bang theory is correct there should be more life out there then us becouse the earth was made out of the same stuff as the rest of the plantes so why is it that earth is the only haptible place that we know of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Simpson Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 1. if the big bang theory is correct there should be more life out there then us becouse the earth was made out of the same stuff as the rest of the plantes so why is it that earth is the only haptible place that we know of How much of the Universe have we actually explored? About next to nothing. The Universe is so unbelievably vast the human mind can't even begin to fathom the size of it. Does life exist on other planets? Probably, but chances are they know nothing more of us than we know of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 there ARE other solar systems out there...i remember hearing something on the news about them finding a few planets... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharaFett Posted January 10, 2002 Share Posted January 10, 2002 quote: "And I'm getting mad at Shara. First he rants and raves and cusses, then he trashes religious people, then he disses people from the South, which I REALLY resent, then he has multiple triple posts. I don't have much respect for him at all." i dont care HOW mad you are at me. i didnt rant i just stated what you may believe is politically incorrect. i'm no psycho, so i dont rant. call it whatever you want, trashing, bashing, flaming, i'm sticking with my opinion that religious people are ignorant and, in many ways, dumbfounded. and as for teh south, the south has been notorious all throughout history of being ignorant to science. IT"S RIGHT IN THE LAW BOOKS, PEOPLE. and "multiple triple posts?" awwwww. dont get mad pweeeeze!!! so, in result, nothing i said could be proven incorrect. as for the swearing, i apologize, it wont happen again. and rogue leader or whoever asked me for my "many points." analogous and homologous isnt the only thing that proves the theory of evolution. similarities in dna coding and protein synthesis up to a certain point between organisms point out that they WERE of the same ancestor at one point and that they DID evolve from each other. that is the greatest proof of life and the theory of life there is. and.. DUH, who the hell was it that said earlier that it's impossible to commit to all the religions because they conflict each other? um, THAT'S MY DAMN POINT!!!! all of the basic ideas of all the religions, the basic truths that help guide us such as faith is what's important the rest is just fluff, in my opinion. what, if i believe in god and i'm true and just, but i dont pay the church or pray 5 times a day, 40% of me goes to heaven and 60% of me goes to hell? NEVER IMO will someone who believes in the greateness of god will be damned to hell...NEVER. that is the ONLY truth of the religions. the church, the pope, the mosque are all manmade and therefore not of GOD. now, someone's gonna twist my words, but there it is. everything i've been trying to say. are you people actually trying to justify the bible with "found sunken ships"? you're trying to scientifically justify the bible, whereas the theory of evolution has more valid scientifical evidence quantitave and qualitative-wise-- TEN FOLD. so THERE"S you're proof that evolution stands true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted January 11, 2002 Share Posted January 11, 2002 he ranted again! j/k:p (or am I?) Thank you for not going after southern politicians this time. I've never heard of the water layer thing before and found that to be very interesting. The only other question I have is when was Methuselah born? I thought he was born after the flood. Also when thrawn said that it couldn't be evolution it had to be creation or something like that and he said that it was because God said it is perfect? Well the whole creation part is what was done with God rapidly altering the DNA on earth to form new organisms. This would also explain man. I really like this thread and hope for it's continuence because of the interesting info it has provided me for my bible class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 11, 2002 Share Posted January 11, 2002 OK, I surrender, it's Big Bang Theory. *grumbles* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lord Maul Posted January 11, 2002 Share Posted January 11, 2002 And God said Let there be Light. Flash!!! Big Bang. The Bible was written by men. Men are fallible and known to exaggerate. Otherwise, why would God allow women to be treated as they are in the bible? God forgives. Jesus absolved us of all sin. Again... all sin. Therefore if man did not write the laws, women would have been equals back then. But the men were just going along with the Bible, right? To err is human... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted January 11, 2002 Share Posted January 11, 2002 Well, of course, I mean u can see that the current wrecking force in this solar systems are us, so in some ways an average cat is more intelligent than the avetage human, although bieng a human is more comfortble to bieng a cat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain_drake Posted January 11, 2002 Share Posted January 11, 2002 ummm crazy dog what was that all about i have cat's and while i love them and they are smart but there not even as smart as my dumb cousin so i think your theory is flawd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hannibalscipio Posted January 11, 2002 Share Posted January 11, 2002 Ditto drake. We DO cause the most pollution, but without us, the "common housecat" might not even exist. People are a good thing, not a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artoo Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 I'd like to be a common housecat. They have excellent reflexes and can run faster and jump higher than humans. Also they seem to have the most fun with the least things. Like a piece of string for example. Cats are cool!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hannibalscipio Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 Or stupid, as it could be said. Cats are TOO cool. Dogs are way better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duder Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 Originally posted by hannibalscipio Or stupid, as it could be said. Cats are TOO cool. Dogs are way better. Cats vs Dogs......this is a much better debate than 'Creationism vs Science'. Cats rule Artoo made all the good points, but against the dog you have to admit that they stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hannibalscipio Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 Dogs would survive a lot better in the wild. Also, they're a lot nicer than cats. You know, I have a theory about Shara. It's just like Yoda said, "Fear, Anger, Aggression." He fears being wrong, fears God, so he gets angry when we bring it up. His agression shows itself when he uses his anger to hurl insults and curses at things, such as creationists and Southerners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue15 Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 Here's proof that atsts evolved from tauntauns and at-at evolved from fambaas!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eets Posted January 12, 2002 Share Posted January 12, 2002 You're bored too, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.