Derf
Well-known member
But we don't fix that problem by making new problems.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Why Evolution is real science - let's settle this "debate"!
- Thread starter ThisIsMyUserName
- Start date
justatruthseeker
Member
Exactly why they are so confused about creatures in the fossil record…. They’ve no examples and so have to make things up…
No it just means the tadpole always becomes a frog and never becomes anything else… because the tadpole is a frog…
The tadpole never becomes a butterfly no matter how many billions of years they want to give it…
justatruthseeker
Member
What new problem? The fossil record has never shown any creature slowly evolving into another kind of creature…
Unless your suggesting dinosaurs turning into birds is equivalent to tadpoles turning into frogs that analogy is moot…
justatruthseeker
Member
If you say so…
“Using the writings of the early Church Fathers, the Greek and Latin manuscripts and the testimony of the earliest extant manuscripts of the Bible, of the Bible, Newton claims to have demonstrated that the words "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one", that support the Trinity doctrine, did not appear in the original Greek Scriptures. He then attempts to demonstrate that the purportedly spurious reading crept into the Latin versions, first as a marginal note, and later into the text itself. He noted that "the Æthiopic, Syriac, Greek, Armenian, Georgian and Slavonic versions, still in use in the several Eastern nations, Ethiopia, Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Eastern European Armenia, Georgia, Muscovy, and some others, are strangers to this reading".[5] He argued[6] that it was first taken into a Greek text in 1515 by Cardinal Ximenes. Finally, Newton considered the sense and context of the verse, concluding that removing the interpolation makes "the sense plain and natural, and the argument full and strong; but if you insert the testimony of 'the Three in Heaven' you interrupt and spoil it."[7] Today most versions of the Bible are from the Critical Text[clarification needed] and omit this verse, or retain it as only a marginal reading. However, some argue that the verse is not a later corruption.[8]”
The same for 1 Timothy 3:16
“The shorter portion of Newton's dissertation was concerned with 1 Timothy 3:16, which reads (in the King James Version):
Newton argued that, by a small alteration in the Greek text, the word "God" was substituted to make the phrase read "God was manifest in the flesh" instead of "which was manifested in the flesh".[a] He attempted to demonstrate that early Church writers in referring to the verse knew nothing of such an alteration.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_...Notable_Corruptions_of_Scripture#cite_note-12 This change increases textual support for trinitarianism, a doctrine to which Newton did not subscribe.[11][12] There is evidence that the original Greek read 'ος' but was modified by the addition of a strikethrough to become 'θς' (see the excerpt from the Codex Sinaiticus, above). 'θς' was then assumed to be a contraction of 'θεος'. The biblical scholar Metzger explains, "no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century [...] supports θεος; all ancient versions presuppose ὃς or ὃ; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading of θεος."[13] In other words, Bible manuscripts closest to the original said 'who' and not 'God' in verse 16.”
“Newton concludes: "If the ancient churches in debating and deciding the greatest mysteries of religion, knew nothing of these two texts, I understand not, why we should be so fond of them now the debates are over."[14] With minor exceptions, it was only in the nineteenth century that Bible translations appeared changing these passages. Modern versions of the Bible from the Critical Text usually omit the addition to 1 John 5:7, but some place it in a footnote, with a comment indicating that "it is not found in the earliest manuscripts".[15] Modern translations of 1 Timothy 3:16 following the Critical Text[clarification needed] now typically replace "God" with "He" or "He who", while the literal Emphasized[clarification needed] has "who".[16]”
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
1st John 5
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Psalm 33
6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
( 6 τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ Κυρίου οἱ οὐρανοὶ ἐστερεώθησαν καὶ τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις αὐτῶν· )
Genesis 1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
( 2 ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος, καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου, καὶ πνεῦμα Θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος. )
justatruthseeker
Member
Genesis 1:3
“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.”
Colossians 1:15
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:”
John 8:12
“Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
he that hath seen me hath seen the Father
I and my Father are one.
justatruthseeker
Member
“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
John 17:22
“And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:”
I’d suggest your belief about being one is confused…. Of one mind, purpose thought, not the same person. Unless you are suggesting all believers are millions but one person…
“Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”
Last edited:
Derf
Well-known member
Because a single creature can't evolve into another creature. Evolution, as a theory, requires creatures to have offspring that are different from the original, even if only slightly, which then also have offspring that are slightly different than the 2nd creature, etc., etc. Each of those creatures leaves behind a distinct fossil, perhaps, but there's no way to build a story from a single creature's fossil. It is only the creature it was when it died--it can't be "changing into another creature". The story comes from multiple fossils of multiple creatures (individuals, as @7djengo7 put it). So a type of creature might be said by evolutionists to evolve into another type of creature, but never would they say a single creature evolves into another creature.
Tadpoles turning into frogs would fit their narrative, if we didn't know about frogs today, but only saw fossils of tadpoles, frogs with tails, and mature frogs.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
I was literally just quoting Scripture. I don't know what you're talking about.
justatruthseeker
Member
I’ll give you two million Tiktaalik…
Show me any of them that show even the slightest evolutionary change into another type of creature…. Show me any of the many fossils of any type of creature that shows any change. There doesn’t exist any… Have as many as you like. NONE show any evidence of evolution….
Yes…. Agreed…. They would claim tadpoles evolved into frogs….
Just as if we had never seen dogs in actual life they would claim one evolved into another. But we know this isn’t true.
I assert that these:
Are nothing more than breeds of the same Kind just as these are breeds of the same Kind:
The Ceratopsian no more evolved than dogs did…
justatruthseeker
Member
Suuurrrreee….
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
idk how to pronounce that.
justatruthseeker
Member
Long and drawn out….
I fail to see how exposing the foolishness of the demonic theological myth of evolution is creating any problems at all.
Evolutionists define horses and zebras as different species.
Evolutionists also claim humans and apes are the same species.
And many of them cannot tell the difference between a man and a woman.
It's a problem when you use straw-man arguments.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
So, I have to have a long drawn out R sound to pronounce it? I'm from Boston. 'Sure' is pronounced shoo-ə (sometimes you can mash together the two syllables to make one, but I can't really type out how to do that in symbols, I don't know phonetics that well, but I do know that I struggle to understand how I should pronounce what you wrote "long and drawn out" given my manner of speaking). You know what I mean? There's no R.
justatruthseeker
Member
They also think birds interbreeding right in front of their noses are separate species while insisting happy faced spiders that do this are the same species….Evolutionists define horses and zebras as different species.
Evolutionists also claim humans and apes are the same species.
And many of them cannot tell the difference between a man and a woman.
Evolution wouldn’t exist without contradictions so that any claim can be made at any time….
justatruthseeker
Member
Last edited: