Creationism/Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-02-2014, 11:26 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 09:21 PM)Vosur Wrote:  I don't think I ever said that. One of our admins (KC) is an evolutionary creationist, so it's obviously possible to believe in both.

But not sanely. Drinking Beverage

wow your the mini/man over here huh? 17K posts.. I don't think mini has that many post on this site and AF combined.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 11:27 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 10:47 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 10:43 PM)Drich Wrote:  actually there are a few looking to write a paper on it.

LMFAO.
The names are ? Of course you failed to tell us who, and where they got their educations, and where they work, and what they have written, or anything they have done. You're a total charlatan. A fraud. Shame on you.
Your presuppositional assumptions in the OP belie your ignorance. You have utterly failed to demonstrate why anyone would take one of the MANY MANY ancient creation myths seriously. The people who assembled those texts from KNOWN sources written by humans had NO CLUE what actually happened more than a few years before they wrote their texts. They thought the Earth stood on 4 pillars, covered by a "firmament", and had NO insight into human evolution, or the actual facts concerning how humans developed. Genetics PROVES your timeline is impossible. You are a hypocrite. YOU would use DNA, if it served you, yet in order to contort the facts to make your crap case, you have to ignore Genetics. Of course you are too uneducated to even know why that is true.

did you get a chance to answer the retard question I asked?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 11:30 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:23 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Here is one I have been working on for a while. Evolutionist and creationist both hate it, so I guess I am on to something.

Oh fuck, here we go again... Dodgy


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Very simply put, I point out their is no time line between the creation of man and the fall of man. I also point out that outside of details of creation itself everything mentioned, takes place in the Garden. Basically between the four rivers that define the garden, God created a picture of the world that would be consistent with the evolutionary progress of man at the time of the fall. Meaning God knew when Adam would fall into sin and knew He would have to expel Adam and Eve so He created the garden to reflect what the world would look like at the time of the fall. So when they left they could easily adapt and co mingle with 'monkey man.' (Or man who evolved from slime.)


[Image: 3035906.jpg]

Is there any evidence for anything you just said that lies outside of scripture? Because I must remind you that the Bible is not evidence, it is the claim.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Evolved man or "monkey man" is man without a soul, and In the Garden Man, was created in the image of God, that would be man with a soul. In essence That would leave room for whole complete fossil record that could not be previously reconciled scripturally. It also explains the city Cain moved to, and the wives and husbands the children of Adam and Eve took for themselves. (They intermingled with monkey man/woman and pass their gift of a soul onto their children. As per Hebrew tradition that a man's "contribution" to the reproductive process is to give the body a soul.)

Please substantiate the existence of a 'soul', and once you do and have your finding verified in peer review you can then proceed to collect your Nobel Prize.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Now I know the goto verse to disprove this is in Genesis 5:4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.

No, the go-to thing to do is to demand evidence; which is precisely what you have yet to provide. Empty conjecture is not evidence.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  In the English it seems that Adam's total existence was 930 years. But when we look at the Hebrew the word that is translated "lived" is:Chay it means:1) to live, have life, remain alive, sustain life etc... (In short God gave Him "life"/Chay at the point of creation, and then per genesis3:3 the day they ate of the fruit from the tree of knoweledge[sic] they would die. Or rather their initial Chay would be gone.) So as per Gods warning Adam and Eve died that very day, or rather the life they were orginally[sic] given at the moment they were created ended when they ate the fruit. Upon explusion[sic] from the garden Adam and Eve were to 'live' out side the garden. this word 'live is also the same word used in the 930 years adam[sic] had "lived." This word in the Hebrew is: chayay. It means 'restored life.' So the 930 years Adam lived was the time he spent outside the garden or Chayay. Adam while He lived (Chay) in the garden was immortal and the bible does not say how long he lived there.

Once again, evidence or GTFO. You're bending of the passage to read into it what you want it to say to fit your ideas is not evidence that any human actually managed to live for almost a millennium.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  How do we know they were immortal in the Garden with God? because of Genesis 2:16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat;

Amongest those trees was the tree of life. What did the tree of life do?

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- in short the reason Adam was cast out of the garden was to keep Him eating from the tree of Iife.[sic] If he had never eaten from this tree, there would have been no reason to make him leave.

For fuck's sake...

Quoting scripture is not evidence, it is the fucking claim. It has be corroborated and substantiated with independent sources outside the Bible, sources which you have failed to provide.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  So to recap:
God created Man and woman and placed them in the garden. They could have been there a day before eating the forbidden fruit or they could have been there the 900 million bazillion years the scientist believe it took to evolve. Why? because there is no recorded time time between: "In the beginning" and the fall of man. Only speculation because we can count the generations back 6000 or so years.

You have still given no reason to think that any of this is remotely plausible.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  When in fact all we can really say is that man made in the image of God has been out of the Garden 6000 or so years. We know the Garden was a sanctuary, (Per Genesis 2 as it's creation was recorded seperatly[sic] than the rest of creation found in Genesis 1, and we know that God kept Man created in His image there for an undisclosed amount of time. This does not means the rest of the world did not have to evolve as the undeniable fossil record proves.

"We know the Garden was a sanctuary"

Fuck you, we do not know that. Let's also not forget that the very order of creation is different in Genesis 1 and 2 that you now quote as 'evidence'.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Something very important to note this is NOT "Gap theory" or Creation theory as made popular in the 17 century. Even though the empty term Gap Creation theory can apply, as far as I know this is something very new.

You're right, this doesn't remotely come close to any scientific theory (it's not even a hypothesis); it's just stupid presumptuous apologetic bullshit.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  (This is creation gap theory:What is the "Gap Theory?" • ChristianAnswers.Net
In short between genesis 1:1 and 1:2 there is a whole nother[sic] version of creation story. The problem here is there is added or filler material between the two accounts. )

No, once again, the problem is a complete lack of any evidence.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Why is it important to distance this theory from Gap creation theory?? Because it combines the unmolested Genesis account AS RECORDED IN THE BIBLE, with the evolutionary data we have discovered and can not other wise reconcile. Without Adding anything to scripture or taking anything away. This also explains several other creation "paradoxes" that atheist tend to use to disprove the genesis account.

Baseless conjecture, even if built upon your particularly favorite 1'st century book of myths, is still baseless conjecture until it is supported by evidence; none of which you have provided. Thus everything you have written so far gets remanded to the dust bin and will not be seriously considered until there is real evidence (i.e. more than just quoting scripture, which is all you've been able to do) to support it.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  I have only taken the face value account of (a literal 7 days of creation) Genesis and lined the holes up with the holes in the evolutionary account of origins and they fit together perfectly.

There are no 'holes in the evolutionary account of origins' because evolution is the theory to explain biodiversity, not the origins of life. Your combined level of ignorance and arrogance is staggering. That you'd presume to sit her and lecture to us when you yourself don't know the fucking difference between evolution and abiogenesis?

Do us all a favor and go get a fucking education. Dodgy


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  What do you think?

I think you're a retarded shill.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  I would like to refine and clean up this account of origins and start circulating it. Because there is literally nothing the atheist can say or do to disprove anything.

You have yet to provide any evidence for any of your assertions, so there is simply nothing that needs to be disproved because you have utterly failed to establish anything.

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
-Christopher Hitchens


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Their standard goto the evidence only further supports the creation account at this point.

Please do explain how a complete lack of evidence for your position validates your position. Go on, I'll wait. Drinking Beverage


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  This takes the account of "origins" out of the atheist arsenal for a legitmate[sic] reason they do not believe in God. While on the Atheist website because they saw the logic of this explanation many who originally greeted me with harsh words and complete disrespect started to ask legitimate questions.

Evidence, the complete lack of any evidence is just one of the many reasons that many self-proclaimed atheists don't believe in god(s). Many of us all don't believe in your god in particular on the grounds of logical impossibility, or have moral and ethical objections to your genocidal maniac Yahweh.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  If you like to see the actual discourse The website is atheist forums dot org. This place is not for the faint of heart there are little to no rules about what is said or seen there. It is under the religion/Christian category under drich "evolution."

No thanks, reading this stupid drivel once is more than enough. I do it so that others need not suffer.


(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Also I been wanting to make a short video on this and post it on YouTube. With your background in technology I think that would be possible if your interested. Also while I am thinking about it I would like to talk to you about revamping our company website if that is something you do.

Are you trying to talk to Seth Andrews, the site's founder? He doesn't peruse the forums, better luck next time.

Take your shit with you, and please do let the door hit you in the ass on the way out...
before I go line by line, you do understand the purpose of my theory right?

It is to incorporate those of faith into what you believe... When you ask for proof, it makes you not seem to understand the point or purpose of what is being discussed here. Do you want a chance to amend your post, or do you want me to address your points as if you are an obstinate child?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 11:32 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:22 PM)Drich Wrote:  Do you know what 3000+ years of sand and wind does to broken pottery?

Sand and wind buries pottery within a few days and preserves it forever. As if sand could erode pottery away. You don't know FUCK about physics, do you. OR pottery, or that matter.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 11:35 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:22 PM)Drich Wrote:  It puts Creationist SIC on a level playing field with the rest of you want to be [SIC] monkies [SIC]




It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 11:41 PM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2014 06:51 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:30 PM)Drich Wrote:  before I go line by line, you do understand the purpose of my theory right?

It is to incorporate those of faith into what you believe... When you ask for proof, it makes you not seem to understand the point or purpose of what is being discussed here. Do you want a chance to amend your post, or do you want me to address your points as if you are an obstinate child?


The 'purpose' of your 'theory' is a sad ignorant attempt by you to fit the square peg of Biblical literalism into the round hole of modern scientific reality; and you have failed miserably to do so.

Faith is 'belief without evidence', which is terrible way to determine truth from falsehood or the nature of reality; and it's precisely why science both doesn't rely on faith and is so fucking successful at determining the nature of reality.

Address my post if it makes your dick feel bigger, but until you have some corroborative evidence, you have just as much plausibility as someone calming that the Easter Bunny created the universe. Which is to say you have zero plausibility, because you have utterly failed to meet your burden of proof. So long you ignorant charlatan, go sell your shit someplace else.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
03-02-2014, 11:51 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:23 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Take your shit with you, and please do let the door hit you in the ass on the way out...


You know, I *tried* to keep this fucking puppy on the paper.


------ But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO---

[Image: John_Belushi.jpg]

Anjele and MomsurroundedbyRentBois -- and whatever other backbiting chickenshits who were too much of cowards to show their faces -- just COULDN'T fucking stand for me to call him out on his bullshit.

I don't want to hear a fucking word of complaint from anyone over this son of a bitch setting up his little shop of fallacious horrors here in our little corner of the universe.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 04:16 AM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
So Drich,
You don't seem to grasp what the problem you're having here is.

Though I don't feel that you'll accept it, I'll point it out for you:

The nonbelievers who are responding to you have a complete understanding of what faith is. You, as a believer, do not.

Aside from your egos need to somehow justify the unprovable things you claim, toward those who don't believe, what else is motivating you to post this stuff?

"If you're going my way, I'll go with you."- Jim Croce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Kestrel's post
04-02-2014, 05:30 AM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
[/quote]
If you want evidence then why not take God up on His offer to provide it for anyone who Asks Seeks and Knocks as out lined in Luke 11?
[/quote]

[Image: UMVC3-GUIA-CRITICSIGHT-VERGIL.png]


I NEED MORE EVIDENCE!Tongue

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 05:46 AM (This post was last modified: 04-02-2014 06:59 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 11:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 10:47 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  LMFAO.
The names are ? Of course you failed to tell us who, and where they got their educations, and where they work, and what they have written, or anything they have done. You're a total charlatan. A fraud. Shame on you.
Your presuppositional assumptions in the OP belie your ignorance. You have utterly failed to demonstrate why anyone would take one of the MANY MANY ancient creation myths seriously. The people who assembled those texts from KNOWN sources written by humans had NO CLUE what actually happened more than a few years before they wrote their texts. They thought the Earth stood on 4 pillars, covered by a "firmament", and had NO insight into human evolution, or the actual facts concerning how humans developed. Genetics PROVES your timeline is impossible. You are a hypocrite. YOU would use DNA, if it served you, yet in order to contort the facts to make your crap case, you have to ignore Genetics. Of course you are too uneducated to even know why that is true.

did you get a chance to answer the retard question I asked?

So even you think your question was retarded ?
The names. What are the names of real scholars who take Genesis literally ?
Oh. You mean you made that up too.
Why would I have a conversation with an ignorant liar ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: