1 2 3
Of course using the Bible will get you this answer. If you use science, it doesn't.
And #4 has nothing to do with evolution.
11/3/2006 7:59:09 PM
Wolf O'Donnell (SWHQ)
WEll done, AV1611VET, you have proved once and for all that your mind is stuck in 1611. Well, apart from the fact that people in 1611 were far more reasonable and logical than you.
11/4/2006 12:44:22 PM
1. Using the Bible to calculate time is like using an abacus to do calculus.
2. \"Very good\" =/= \"perfect\". \"Very good\" has the clear implication that there can be better.
3-4. Learn not to be so strictly literal. It would enhance your understanding of the text you hold in such high regard.
11/4/2006 1:04:33 PM
On point number 2: Things rapidly went downhill. remember the snake and the fruit? Or Noah? Wasn't there room for improvement there? (I know that those are more psychological than physical, but he probably doesn't)
11/4/2006 1:22:38 PM
This of course is based on a false premise: that the Bible isn't a colection of myths.
11/4/2006 1:31:07 PM
Mike said it best. Exactly what I was thinking.
11/4/2006 3:35:14 PM
Jezebel's Evil Sister
All four points are total BS, of course, but I was wondering about point #3, \"No animals died before the fall.\"
Does anyone know the supposed time interval between creation and the fall? My impression was that the Garden of Eden had a very short run, hardly long enough for any animal to have lived out its natural lifespan and to have died by natural causes.
11/4/2006 4:02:44 PM
Why are you using the bible as evidence against evolution? The bible isn't even evidence for God or Jesus. Let alone against evolution.
11/4/2006 4:16:30 PM
He should rename this \"4 Faiths against Evolution.\"
Quoting Bible verses isn't reasoning.
11/4/2006 4:17:27 PM
1.Ah, so you appreciate that evolution occurs over a very long time span, and (as there is evidence for this process) the bibble's time-piece must be inaccurate. Excellent.
2. This would explain the 'Flood' then, yes? God's very own etch-a-sketch restoration project.
3. If this is true (and obviously it requires the total suspension of logic and reasoning), why would any animals have been required to reproduce? Was god just stock-piling?
4. We all believe what our dad's tell us, until we grow up and think for ourselves.
11/4/2006 4:28:25 PM
\"4 Reasons against Evolution
1. NOT ENOUGH TIME
*Using the Bible to calculate time, one concludes that the earth has gone around the sun roughly 6100 times. This is much too short a timespan for evolution to have occurred.\"
Uh huh. \"Using the Bible to calculate time\" is your problem. The Bible is unreliable source material.
\"2. THERE IS NO ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
*Genesis 1:31 - And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.\"
So, you contend that everything is perfect? Even if what you say is true, there is room for improvement over \"very good.\" How 'bout excellent or perfect?
\"3. NO ANIMALS DIED PRIOR TO THE FALL
*Romans 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:\"
The stories in Genesis are fiction. Original sin is a fiction and a truly bad facet of Xian theology. And, as I mentioned earlier, the Bible is unreliable source material.
\"4. JESUS BELIEVED IN CREATION - NOT EVOLUTION
*Mark 10:6 - But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.\"
The biblical Jesus is a fictional character. That the persons who wrote what Jesus supposedly said did not mention the ToE is because the ToE hadn't been developed at their time.
11/4/2006 4:34:11 PM
and if there's no room for improvment, then explain the appendix. Explain why 60-80% of humans suffer back pain.
If this is unimprovable, then frankly, i think we need to reconsider god's design qualifications.
A committee of 3 18 years olds with a good grounding in anatomy and physiology could improve the mark I human.
11/4/2006 4:44:32 PM
Reasons why I don´t like fundyism, THE BIBLE IS A RELIGIOUS BOOK, NOT SCIENTIFIC. And Jesus couldn´t believe in a theory which didn´t exist at the moment. What he meant on that sentence is that it was his idea of marriage. PERIOD.
11/4/2006 4:45:22 PM
3. NO ANIMALS DIED PRIOR TO THE FALL
*Romans 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Is he admitting that humans are animals?
11/4/2006 4:50:57 PM
Adrian1. NOT ENOUGH TIME
*Using the Bible to calculate time, one concludes that the earth has gone around the sun roughly 6100 times. This is much too short a timespan for evolution to have occurred.
Even ignoring the stupidity of relying on the Babble for scientific matters, you're wrong: bacterias, fruit flies, etc. 'nuff said.
11/4/2006 5:03:26 PM
\"Using the Bible to calculate time, one concludes that the earth has gone around the sun roughly 6100 times.\"
Wrong. Using the Bible, one can calculate that the sun went up the sky and down on the other side of a flat Earth 6100*365 times.
11/4/2006 5:09:18 PM
The Bible is evidence of nothing save paper-making, printing, book-binding, and bad writing.
11/4/2006 5:34:28 PM
Round and round the logic goes, and where it starts, nobody knows ...
11/4/2006 5:58:10 PM
Using the Bible to 'disprove' evolution. How quaint.
11/4/2006 7:17:41 PM
I got as far as \"Using the Bible to calculate time ...\" Then I took a nap.
11/4/2006 10:14:14 PM
Exactly, prove it without a literal interpretation of the Bible, or better yet, without referring to it at all.
11/4/2006 11:40:37 PM
Point-by-point refutation, from a Christian viewpoint as well:
1. Using YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible, that is. The evidence tends to disagree. I favor an interpretation that fits the facts.
2. Genesis 1:31 describes the time after humans already appeared. Before that, there were millions of years of evolution. And afterward, there was still room for improvement, as humans developed a great deal of new technology, bacteria became resistant to drugs, etc.
3. Emphasis added to your verse:
*Romans 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all MEN, for that all have sinned
Note that it says \"men.\" Not \"all life.\"
4. Jesus didn't say anything related to evolution in this passage. Simply saying that God created life does not invalidate evolution.
11/5/2006 1:47:51 AM
What is with you people being squeamish about point #4?
If Jesus was this mythical character some of you like to think he is, he wouldn't have thought that at all...
Ergo he's not.
Stop fence sitting or believing in complete shit like theistic evolution - seriously, the fundies have more intellectual integrity than that; at least they're sticking with their 'all or none' rationale instead of cherry picking. Sure they're wrong, but so's cherry picking - it's just as wilfully ignorant, only you should be smart enough to know better!
11/5/2006 1:51:08 AM
Correct! If you accept the Bible as 100% accurate and true, then evolution is, in fact, a huge steaming pile of dino crap.
If, however, you base your view of the world on something other that the musings of a group of bronze-age mysoginists who thought that the world was flat, the earth was the center of the universe, and God had \"chosen\" them above all other human beings for no reason whatsoever, like, say, empirical evidence and logic for example, then things looks a lot different.
11/5/2006 2:21:30 AM
AV1611VET has proven that a literal reading of the wholly babble is in consistent with the discoveries made by science. Now, which of the two is wrong?
11/5/2006 3:37:12 AM
1 2 3