The Bible indicates that some would be led away by false science and false teachings.
And that is why the Bible gave a warning to beware of science falsly so called.
And the Bible tells us that in the time of the end boastful men would be saying show us the sign of His coming. Another words, the Bible tells us that when Christ returns the world will be in total shock, and will morn because most of the earth will not be ready to stand before the living God.
If questioning my beliefs were the only proof I could offer for the truth of the Bible, I would not have much of a belief. I am looking a the bigger picture here.
Basically saying that questioning your belief is proof of your belief.
Anything not agreeing with the bible is "false science". Again, this says that anything questioning your beliefs proves them.
The prophecy says that people will demand proof of the second coming. You claim that the current questioning of your beliefs proves the prophecy, basically using skepticism to reinforce your beliefs.
And if I only had the tiny shreds of evidence you claim are the only supporters of evolution, I would not have much of a belief either.
Your evidence for evolution does not exist.
When you look at the history of Evolution you can convince some that you have this great warehouse of proof. Yet on closer inspection we find through the years much of it, if not all of it has been dismissed even by your own people.
Exhibits have been removed to be replaced by new exhibits that will be proven later on to be false as well.
So each year they come up with the latest missing link that gets your people all worked up, but then in the course of time, that link is dismissed as well.
Of course it is not dismissed with the fanfare as it was received, yet it is dimissed. After all these years, the untrained joe public thinks there is this great warehouse that holds the truth of Evolution. If they looked inside what they would find, is just one big empty building.
And perhaps a table of new discoveries that prove Evolution. And that is the way it has gone year after year. Now we have the new transitionals. What we have is fully formed species that bears no resmeblance to what they claim it is suppose to be. Of course, like yesterdays transitionals, these to will be dismissed as well.
To me what is going on in the Evolution world today is almost like a form of insanity. Trying to take land animals and turn them into aquatic creatures. They have no real fossil evidence, but a hand full of bones, and then with many brush strokes, and great imagination, they create their artificial transitionals. What I see is a total lack of common sense.
How many times have you believed what Evolution has told you, until it turns out that they were wrong again.
Do you just get your talking points from the latest publications until they say you can't believe that anymore? Because I have to tell you, if you are as old as I am, you would of been doing that a lot.
You heard the old saying fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. How many times have you been fooled?
And I'm going to tell you, that the transionals that you believe in today will be dismissed down the road. And you will have to forget about them, but don't worry, they will have new transionals for you to believe in, they always do.
I beg to differ. You have not scientifically disproven any of the findings that I have posted. You go on about things that are older than the two of us combined, things that science has long since thrown away and somehow say that this means there is no proof for evolution. Take a scroll through all the links I have posted. You have not disproven any of them. I see no links saying how such-and-such transitional fossil is wrong, or any findings are incorrect.
Links. Please.
95% of scientists believe evolution to be correct. 65% of the world believes evolution to be correct. This does not happen if all of the evidence is dismissed.
Links. Please.
"Missing Link" is a creationist term used to define something that will not be found. There is no single "missing link".
I saw that when I was a Christian. Except it was looking inside a church, where the answer to everything unknown was "Because God says so".
Proof that these species were fully formed. SCIENTIFIC PROOF they were fully formed. You have none.
Yet random cave erosion turns into dinos fighting mammoths. "Man Tracks" become proof that dinos walked with man. Random squiggles become "petraglyphs". Saying that the world is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs walked with man is COMPLETE insanity. We've dated things on this planet to billions of years in age. We've dated THE PLANET at roughly 4 billion years. Tools used by early man were dated to 2 million years old.
How again, does a 6,000 year old Earth work into this?
It takes more imagination to see a dino and mammoth fighting in cave erosion than it does in tracing ancestry through fossils.
About as many times as you have believed what the Bible tells you. Seriously, do you believe a flood engulfed this entire planet? Do you believe that snakes talked? People turned into pillars of salt? Angels wielded magic swords? A deity passing down law through a burning bush at the top of a mountain?
And you get yours from the latest creationist sites and publications. Usually verbatim.
Did I mention that I once was a Christian?
We haven't forgotten our transitionals. Did you even look at the links I provided?
Didn't you guys say that dinosaurs were tests of faith? What a turn you all made from that to "dinos walked with man!" From complete denial to an attempted explaination that simply does not work.
Now that your six day creation period isn't panning out, you swing another hard right and go with "Intelligent Design" in a futile attempt to gain a foothold in the world of science. Yet a REPUBLICAN, CHURCHGOING CHRISTIAN (READ: YOUR people) judge ruled that ID was religion and was not scientific in any form.
So who's denying who now?
So you believe that an artistic drawing of what someone thinks a transitional
might or should look like is sceintific proof?
And I never said the earth is 6,000 years old, so what's your point?
And fossils do show ancestry. They just don't show Evolution. And if they do, can we see PROOF of this? Because your links have never pointed that out. And I have pointed out to you that your own people state that evolution is not present in the fossil record.
I never said dinosaurs were a test of faith. And I don't doubt that some people did, and I'm sure some of them were Christians. Just as some in the field of science stated Nebraska man and a long line of others were fossil links to modern evolution. Both groups were wrong.
A judge also said late term abortions were legal, now they say it is a crime against humanity. Take your pick.
And I can tell you this right now, you were never a Christian.
Mr.Campbell, i'm still waiting for you to explain why Vestigal structures exist if evolution is wrong....
Men having breasts are a from of Vestriall evidence that all man are created with the same DNA and are given their sex upon gestation to which ever type of male sperm that offers the fertilization process, does that fact offer proof of evolution? No Vestrial function or becoming obsolete in the need of its use does not offer proof of anything. In fact it has been proven that man uses only a portion of its brain capacity for learning and retaining knowledge, is a man's brain Vestrial in that regard? More speculation, you are the one that introduced the subject into the topic, the proof as to how it proves that evolution is a fact would rest in your ability to prove its relevance, not for someone to conversely discredit it. The Bible states that man was created fully formed, and as of yet science offers no valid proof that man has evolved from anything, to do so would fly in the face of biogenesis , a scientific method that has far superior indicators of truth than does the theory of "evolution". Presenting evidence for the Creation Science Model
Men having breasts are a from of Vestriall evidence that all man are created with the same DNA and are given their sex upon gestation to which ever type of male sperm that offers the fertilization process, does that fact offer proof of evolution? No Vestrial function or becoming obsolete in the need of its use does not offer proof of anything. In fact it has been proven that man uses only a portion of its brain capacity for learning and retaining knowledge, is a man's brain Vestrial in that regard? More speculation, you are the one that introduced the subject into the topic, the proof as to how it proves that evolution is a fact would rest in your ability to prove its relevance, not for someone to conversely discredit it. The Bible states that man was created fully formed, and as of yet science offers no valid proof that man has evolved from anything, to do so would fly in the face of biogenesis , a scientific method that has far superior indicators of truth than does the theory of "evolution". Presenting evidence for the Creation Science Model
Men having breasts are a from of Vestriall evidence that all man are created with the same DNA and are given their sex upon gestation to which ever type of male sperm that offers the fertilization process, does that fact offer proof of evolution? No Vestrial function or becoming obsolete in the need of its use does not offer proof of anything. In fact it has been proven that man uses only a portion of its brain capacity for learning and retaining knowledge, is a man's brain Vestrial in that regard? More speculation, you are the one that introduced the subject into the topic, the proof as to how it proves that evolution is a fact would rest in your ability to prove its relevance, not for someone to conversely discredit it. The Bible states that man was created fully formed, and as of yet science offers no valid proof that man has evolved from anything, to do so would fly in the face of biogenesis , a scientific method that has far superior indicators of truth than does the theory of "evolution". Presenting evidence for the Creation Science Model
Men having breasts are a from of Vestriall evidence that all man are created with the same DNA and are given their sex upon gestation to which ever type of male sperm that offers the fertilization process, does that fact offer proof of evolution? No Vestrial function or becoming obsolete in the need of its use does not offer proof of anything. In fact it has been proven that man uses only a portion of its brain capacity for learning and retaining knowledge, is a man's brain Vestrial in that regard? More speculation, you are the one that introduced the subject into the topic, the proof as to how it proves that evolution is a fact would rest in your ability to prove its relevance, not for someone to conversely discredit it. The Bible states that man was created fully formed, and as of yet science offers no valid proof that man has evolved from anything, to do so would fly in the face of biogenesis , a scientific method that has far superior indicators of truth than does the theory of "evolution". Presenting evidence for the Creation Science Model
Love the way creation 'THEORY' is replaced with creation 'MODEL'. SAME THING DIFFERENT WORDS.
That argument was lost the INSTANT the word "supernatural" was used to answer scientific questions.
"God did it" isn't sufficient.
That is why "NO ONE" can disprove faith, as it is "THE HOPE OF THINGS TO COME". Science cannot disprove something that is admitted, That God, validates his message with signs and wonders that only exists from the realm which created all. Science has no power to disprove this statement, sense God created the very laws of nature that man and science must abide by, unless a Word is spoken to the contrary by He which created the very laws that he "chooses" to breach, when and where He wishes. It can not be disproved, it is admitted as being contrary to the natural laws of science, and does not need man to validate its truth.
As Christians, there are many things in which we believe by faith. It all starts with Genesis. We believe that God created this universe and this world from nothing, not in the converse formula espoused by secular humanism that everything was created from nothing by no one nor anything (Heb.11:3). Yet, some claim to be Christians who have trouble with this concept, but if a person does not have the faith to believe this, how the world began, then if you can not trust the scriptures in this regard, how can we trust later parts of the same book? Because we believe God created us, we strive to please our creator (Heb. 11:6). Christians believe that the Bible is God's revealed word, written in the original language exactly as God desired, and the Bible contains everything we need by which to live a long, honest, joyful life (11 Tim. 3:16-17). What else is there to strive for in this life besides, heath, happiness, truthfulness and hope for eternity? That is my faith defined, and it cannot be contradicted by other opinions of ideology, based only on theory, whether it be from science or man, and indeed it is the unwise man that does not believe truth, offered in factual evidence, none of which, have I been witness to in relation to the origins of man, provided by science. RD
That is why "NO ONE" can disprove faith,
...any faith for that matter, but that doesn't mean we should believe in something just because we can't disprove it....BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF PROOF!!!
as it is "THE HOPE OF THINGS TO COME".
wishful thinking at best!
Science cannot disprove something that is admitted, That God, validates his message with signs and wonders that only exists from the realm which created all.
nor can it be proved.
Science has no power to disprove this statement,
science has no power to prove it either.
sense God created the very laws of nature that man and science must abide by, unless a Word is spoken to the contrary by He which created the very laws that he "chooses" to breach,
How do you know this? Where is this said? The bible! But the bible was written by man as was every other book ever written!
It can not be disproved
or proved
As Christians, there are many things in which we believe by faith. It all starts with...
i am aware of what christians believe don't belittle my intelligence.
What else is there to strive for in this life besides, heath, happiness, truthfulness and hope for eternity?
how about living a fullfilling life?
That is my faith defined, and it cannot be contradicted by other opinions of ideology, based only on theory,
interesting, your hypothesis cannot be contradicted by theory!?
whether it be from science or man, and indeed it is the unwise man that does not believe truth,
but it is debated which is true, all religions claim to be the only true way and yet all of them claim that all of the others are wrong, it is all he-said she-said type of situation so i will stick with my belief that all of them are wrong!
evidence offere by science, none of which, have I been witness to in relation to the origins of man,
i can say the same about about evidence offered by your god!
I do not want to be disrepectful Mr. Campbell, but your guys are the ones that are teaching false science and are getting away with it. Science does not claim to be abolute. Religion does. The story creation in the Bible where the snake talks to Adam and Eve is no more creditable than the story in the Koran where Muhammad rode to heaven and back on a horse that had wings. They are both Myths. In fact the latter sounds more believable. Remember Moble's flying red horse. Half of the people who go to church don't believe all of this mythology. Most of these people seem to believe there their is truth in the basic teaching of the Bible, but was was written by people who also wrote in the context of what people believed at the time. The problem is how far do you go with this?
People also do not want to cut themselves off from their families and become the black sheep. This is why all of these myths aren't going away anytime soon.
You believe cave erosion of what someone thinks is a dino and mammal fighting is scientific proof?
Your general view of the whole thing is life didn't hit the scene until ~ 10,000 years ago. You've tried to prove this several times. Why the short timespan?
So we can show DIRECT ancestry between modern birds and dinosaurs, but that's not enough to show that birds evolved from dinosaurs? The soft tissue you praise was a shot in the arm for that theory.
Show me some links to scientific papers pointing out what you say. Show me the scientists that say this along with their credentials. You're aiming at a very small percentage here.
No, but your people did. Some still do. Your "Nebraska Man" is long since tossed in the garbage and taken out to the landfill in the eyes of science and evolution. I never said I believed in Nebbie.
See what I'm getting at?
That is all in a person's morals and is a discussion for a different thread.
Who are you to say who is/was not a Christian? The religion I no longer follow. The book... it's not that bad. People just take it way too damn far and that's ultimately what made me seek other ways.
When did Jesus go from a person you make a spiritual connection with to help you lead a better life through the teaching of his book... to fighting scientists and teachers, using political pressure, Evangelism and condemning people to an eternity in Hell (not to mention blaming a tragedy on people who others in your religion do not approve of), and just forcing your beliefs into everything you possibly can?
Do I care if our money says "In God We Trust"? F**k no. I don't even have my money long enough to pay attention to that. Do I care if God is in my science books? Oh yes. Religion is not science.
Mens 'breasts' did not becaome obsolete, they have never been used.
'ALL' fetus' start life as 'FEMALES' therefore they have always had breasts, at a certain point in the pregnancy the sex is decided.
If 'MAN' was created in gods image, why then do 'ALL' fetus start their life as 'FEMALES'. Surely as the 'dominant' sex god would have had it the other way around.
