SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : public prayer?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
BenWilliams
Member



Joined: 2006/12/11
Posts: 351
El Paso, Texas

 Re:

bubbaguy wrote:

Quote:
the points you make in your listing are about comparing the details of scientific study with the details of an account of the creation of life written thousands of years ago. of course they do not fit together. how could they? you might as well compare Shakespear with morse code. the point i take from Genesis is that God created the heavens and the earth. that God intended for mankind to be here and live as His children, striving to love one another, overcome the adversity we brought upon ourselves, and to conquer death and hatred by honoring God and loving our fellow humans.



bubbaguy, do you know what the definition of science is?

It is the gathering of information from "observation" encompassing the whole issue.

Evolutionists have absolutely no evidence that they have gathered verifiably, and certainly not from observation of anything.

They are not scientists, they are people who believe in a false religion. They call it science however, and contrast it with the Bibles teaching for one main purpose, do you know what that is?

Their purpose is to say look, creation is not true, it is a fairy tail, and then it digresses to, and so is God, and then it further digresses to and neither is all of scripture true.

Evolutionist have yet to produce one piece of testable evidence to show that it is true. If there is one, show it to me. There are none whatsoever.


_________________
Benjamin Williams

 2007/10/23 18:32Profile









 Re:

Ben, ccchhhrrriiisss is correct that scientific theories are contually being revised to incorporate new discoveries and new findings, but that doesn't mean that evolution is false.

Evolution cannot be proven, as with most scientific theories. But since you asked, here is some basic information on evolution for your consideration:

First, scientists are very skeptical. The approach many scientists take is to try to disprove a theory. That way they know it is false. Evolution is a theory that has not yet been disproved. It is always best to define one's terms before explaining something. Evolution, in this context, is how life in general changes over time. There is little doubt that life on earth has changed over time. It is believed that 99% of all the species that have lived on earth, are now extinct.

Extinction of a species is one way in which life evolves. That evolution occurs within populations of life forms on earth is well supported. Scientists measure gene frequencies and protein structures in a group of organisms, and then see how those frequencies and structures change over time.

Another term you might have heard is "natural selection." It is not the same as evolution. Natural selection simply means that some individuals reproduce more than others, and which leave the most offspring is due to forces at work in nature. If a rabbit made a lot more noise than its neighbor, then it might be more at risk of getting eaten by a lynx or an eagle. If it gets eaten, it will not reproduce anymore. Natural selection has also been shown to occur in nature in many instances. Charles Darwin proposed that this process of natural selection might cause evolution in nature. And that this evolution by natural selection could have been the major force that made so many species of organisms. This was a controversial theory then because it was contrary to what most people believed about how God created each species himself. Today, most people familiar with the evidence for evolution of life on earth, accept it as the best explanation for the diversity of life.

There are two large lines of evidence to support this theory. The first is fossils. The other is HOMOLOGY. All life on earth, according to evolutionary theory, evolved from common ancestors. All life on earth is related to each other; we are all of the same family. Modern whales have hip bones in their flesh that they do not use because they do not walk. They probably evolved from mammals that did walk. Paleontologists have found a fossil whale called Pakicetus that has more developed rear legs. Older whales should look more like their ancestors if evolution is correct. Without evolution, we could not understand why whales have hip bones.

Homologous structures do not have to be used for the same purpose. Whale flippers and human hands are homologous, but are used in very different ways. Another interesting fossil is Archaeopteryx. This was a dinosaur that had feathered wings, like birds. Bird and dinosaurs have a common ancestry. This fossil has teeth, although no bird has teeth. It has the skeleton of a dinosaur, but the feathers of a bird. It shows that there was a time when the difference between birds and dinosaurs was not obvious. Birds are the only remaining species from the dinosaur line.

Homology is a complicated concept. It means
that two structures are similar because they are related genetically. If two structures are similar but not related then they are only analogous. The wings of birds and insects are analogous. They both are used to fly, but in
different ways. They are not related animals. Many differences between their structures make this apparent to the observer. But the wing of a bat and the wing of a bird are homologous. They both contain the same bones. Both have an upper arm bone (humerus), both have a radius and ulna (lower arm bones), and both have wrist bones and metacarpals and digits. They were both derived from the same genetic plan. Look up homology in a biology text for more examples.

There is a growing mountain of evidence that supports evolution. It will never be proven true because we can not know for sure. But by using the scientific method, we can make a good guess, based on careful observations of the earth as it exists today.

Hope this is helpful.

Bub

 2007/10/23 20:41
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 EVOLUTION?

Brethren
Greetings in Jesus' Name by Whose Blood we are Saved and by Whose Hands all things were made.AMEN.

if life-forms evolved from one to another, where are all the half-done ones? :-?

i guess bro Bub can believe as he wishes, bro Bub, if you're right there is nothing to worry about, have you considered that maybe you may be wrong?What will you do if this proves to be the case?

Grace and Peace are ours in Jesus.AMEN.


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2007/10/23 23:40Profile









 Re: EVOLUTION?

Ironman,

the whale's hip bone seems to be an example of the half-done. why is it there?

i evolution turns out to be false, i guess i'll have to eat a monkey's uncle. :-P bub

 2007/10/24 9:04
vsuarez
Member



Joined: 2005/5/2
Posts: 52


 Re: uh, excuse me...

This thread has been cut and replace by a completely new one. If possible, please change the Topic and the catagory so as not to mislead others. Thanks.

 2007/10/24 10:26Profile
BenWilliams
Member



Joined: 2006/12/11
Posts: 351
El Paso, Texas

 Re:

bubbaguy wrote:

Quote:
There is a growing mountain of evidence that supports evolution. It will never be proven true because we can not know for sure. But by using the scientific method, we can make a good guess, based on careful observations of the earth as it exists today.



I understand that just because we can't prove everything, doesn't mean the whole theory should be thrown out, but...

Evolutionists have yet to produce 1 piece of testable, verifiable evidence that can be duplicated, or seen happening today.

Every aspect of evolution is guesswork and belief, none of it has any bearing in the word of God.

The word of God has stated the creation in plain literal form detailing it precisely so that there is no mistake about it.

You have minimized the word of God, and gone seeking after other things. Is it so hard to believe that God did what he said?

You mention a whale hip bone, and say that is evidence, for what? All that proves is that a whale has a hip bone.

Where are the remains of the half whale half human, I know you don't believe that that is the progression, but you see my point.

you say that 99% of all creatures are extinct, it looks like alot more of them than that are here.

For example, go look up the world population, and then multiply that times 99% and see how many of us there would be on earth, and that is just a matter measure of humans, you are talking about species the size of 15 semi trucks.

If you were really an honest man, you would research this from every angle, but you are not, you are a deceived man. The Christian science institute has so much verifiable, duplicatable, and testable evidence that disproves evolution, it is almost laughable to think that people are so blind.

Why don't you look them up, and then go visit them, and see what they have to show, that proves the account in Genisis to be true.

But I doubt you will do that, you like the idea of evolution, because it seems more mystical to you. Well God forgive you for believing a lie instead of the truth.


_________________
Benjamin Williams

 2007/10/24 12:40Profile
IRONMAN
Member



Joined: 2004/6/15
Posts: 1924
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS

 half done and monkey's uncle...

bro Bub
Greetings in Jesus' Name by Whose Blood we are Saved.AMEN.

you said:


Quote:
the whale's hip bone seems to be an example of the half-done. why is it there?



if it wasn't there the whale wouldn't be the whale as we know it. i think it's all the way done serving whatever purpose God had in mind even if it is unknown to us.

Quote:
i evolution turns out to be false, i guess i'll have to eat a monkey's uncle. bub



well i was going to say you'd have to eat crow...but monkey's uncle seems a bit more apt here :-P

Grace and Peace are ours in Jesus.AMEN.


_________________
Farai Bamu

 2007/10/24 14:38Profile









 Re:

Bubbaguy, having read slowly through this thread and seen the evolution (no pun intended) of it, I'm struggling with the simple fact that many of your ideas contradict the Bible.

A good example:

Quote:
The real danger of biblical literalism is that it claims that God spoke and acted in our world within the confines of the words of the Bible, as interpreted by strict constructionalism. God is put into a straightjacket by doing so. and when this straightjacket is removed, what will underpin the beliefs of those who rely upon this manner of viewing the Bible? this is shaky ground upon which to pin a belief system. if Genesis is confounded in this view, all of the Bible becomes suspect. (because "all of it is true, or God is a liar") (someone actually said this to me once.)



I spoke with a Jew a long while ago, and he told me about how Christ cannot have been the Son of God. He said this because while Jesus would have grown up reading the Bible or the books of it that were available at the time, He would have read the prophecies about a Saviour of the world coming. Now somehow, from this, the Jew concluded that Jesus cannot be the Son of God, because He would have been reading the prophecies that spoke in the future tense, and Jesus being the Son of God would therefore require a present tense for Jesus to be reading.

I think this is ludicrous, and I also think that what you have said is ludicrous. By being too narrow-minded in reading your Bible, you have decided, which may seem logical to you, that if the Bible states that God said something, then that is constricting God and putting him 'into a straightjacket'. If I continue the line of thinking that you hold, we then have to conclude that [b]anything[/b] the Bible says God did therefore constricts God and therefore the Bible cannot say anything about God for fear of constricting Him. The Bible is therefore pointless.

The truth is, Jesus [b]is[/b] the Son of God, God [b]did[/b] do what the Bible says He did, and the Bible [b]is[/b] God's Holy, Perfect and True Word. Bible literalism does not place God in a straightjacket, because He Himself wrote it, and I have a little feeling that God knows exactly what He did. When the authors wrote the Bible, they didn't write what they think happened. They write what God [b]knows[/b], because He inspired the authors' writing of it.

If your reasoning for believing evolution is for not taking the Bible literally because it puts Him in a straightjacket, then I better go and pray for you now (phew, long sentence). If the Bible is symbolic, then who's interpretation of it should I believe, study and follow?

 2007/10/24 15:57
seanjol
Member



Joined: 2004/11/12
Posts: 55
Charleston, SC

 Re:

sorry guys, I have to say this. I believe in the big bang

God said it, and bang it happened :-P

You honestly have to have a greater faith to believe in the big bang theory and evolution than one has to have to become a believer in Jesus Christ.

Bubba, I have a degree in Biology and Agronomy and have been well pounded with the dogma. Romans 1 is a perfect picture of those who push and believe in evolution.

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who [b]hold[/b] the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; F6 for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so F7 that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 [b] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, [/b] 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

It's amazing that something God had Paul write 2000 years ago pegs evolutionists today.

May God open your eyes.

Sean


_________________
Sean

 2007/10/24 16:33Profile









 Re: "evolution" - actually devolution!

Hi again Bub

How did we get from the question of public prayer to Evolution?

We have been round and round the Evolution issue many times, and you don't seem any more interested than before in finding out the truth on this subject.

You seem like so many people who believe that the pundits (scientsists, theologians or whatever) must be right because they are the "experts".

Isn't it time you started thinking for yourself, instead of blindly believing the lies that most of us have been drip-fed almost from infancy?

Even scientists can be brainwashed into believing lies, (I was, as stated before in this forum) so it isn't surprising that you have been too, but I wish that you would be willing to at least try to consider objectively the scientific evidence against Evolution in the broader sense. Living things do change and adapt, but that isn't the same as aquiring totally new genetic characteristics (such as a creature, that never had them, developing eyes or wings from scratch. The only definite evidence is of [i]loss[/i] of characteristics, not gain, which, can't possibly produce evolution because it's heading in the opposite direction! For example, blind cave creatures "evolved" from ancestors with eyes, some kinds of flightless birds "evolved" from those that could fly; but there is no evidence whatsoever that it happened the other way around.

Re public prayer, the disciples (recorded in Acts) did it often. When they met together they broke bread, prayed, read and had teaching from, the Scriptures. Where you get the idea that they didn't I can't imagine!

in Him

Jeannette

 2007/10/25 17:35





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy