Do you believe in evolution?

[deltablack22]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
The are a similiar feature in the embryonic development, call them whatever you like but they have many of the same precursors of fish gills.
NO! They are not! That was the point of what I posted earlier. Fact is someone saw them, thought "Hmm that kinda looks like gills! Must show that we evolved from common ancestors since we still have the vestigial organs.". This again falls back into drawings being exaggerated into fitting an agenda. The "gill slit" drawings were illustrated in such a manner that made them appear more like gills. They are in no way shape or form precursors of gills and the scientific community from what I have seen discredits this thought process as well - because it is INCORRECT.

 

[reefreak29]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
But God created Satan correct?
yep he sure did, i strugled with this if God knew satan would become evil why did he create him. I think it was his devine plan for us he knew all that would happen.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Um, WHERE in any of those quotes did you see Darwin claiming to be looking for an alternative to God? All I see is that he was troubled by his findings, alot of which has to do with the fact that he didn't have a lot of the information we have today about genetics.
None of them... I said do your own research.

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by DeltaBlack22
NO! They are not! That was the point of what I posted earlier. Fact is someone saw them, thought "Hmm that kinda looks like gills! Must show that we evolved from common ancestors since we still have the vestigial organs.". This again falls back into drawings being exaggerated into fitting an agenda. The "gill slit" drawings were illustrated in such a manner that made them appear more like gills. They are in no way shape or form precursors of gills and the scientific community from what I have seen discredits this thought process as well - because it is INCORRECT.
They are similarities, the significance of which is up for debate. I personally do not feel they serve as a good point of discussion however someone insisited making a statement about 'apes with gills' I merely pointed out this similarity.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
But God created Satan correct?
No, he created Lucifer as his throne cherubim. Lucifer chose to rebel.

 

[geridoc]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
From Darwin himself. Look up some of his quotes.
For instance:
"To have the unthinking masses accept all that I say would be calamity..."
"What is true in my book will survive, and that which is error will be blown away as chaff."
"To suppose that the eye could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
-Darwin
Clownboy - you really need to do a better job of misrepresenting what people as famous as Darwin say since it is so easy to correct you. Take the last comment, that Darwin felt that formation of the eye by natural selection is an absurd concept: the next sentence in the text reads:
"Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound."
So, while you try to misrepresent Darwin to make your point, your point only becomes weaker. I'm not goiung to address the other misrepresentations - they are all common misrepresentations used by creationists.

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by reefreak29
yep he sure did, i strugled with this if God knew satan would become evil why did he create him. I think it was his devine plan for use he knew all that would happen.
So this means God created satan who created evil, therefore God created evil indirectly. God created man, gave him free will, man betrayed God and brought death into the world. So back to the inital claim it would appear that God indirectly brought death into the world.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
So this means God created satan who created evil, therefore God created evil indirectly. God created man, gave him free will, man betrayed God and brought death into the world. So back to the inital claim it would appear that God indirectly brought death into the world.
read my post regarding this #545

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
None of them... I said do your own research.

Having read much of Darwin's work I feel that I have done plenty of research on the matter and if you have knowledge that I do not it would be kind of you to share. If you know of a quote where Darwin claims that he is out to find an alternative to God, it doesn't seem like it would be difficult for you to cut and paste it for my benefit.

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
No, he created Lucifer as his throne cherubim. Lucifer chose to rebel.
Ok, so he created Lucifer, but evil must have been present for Lucifer to chose to rebel. Also, if you claim that Lucifer rebeled and created evil than God did not create everything and therefore there would have to be multiple creators.

 

[reefreak29]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
So this means God created satan who created evil, therefore God created evil indirectly. God created man, gave him free will, man betrayed God and brought death into the world. So back to the inital claim it would appear that God indirectly brought death into the world.
thats a very hard subject for me but i think it was part of Gods plan so we could make a choice to surve God or serve the world and if we choose to serve God we will spend an eternity with him, thats his gift to us. also God alows free will when we have a child we teach him good but he can choose to do evil

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Having read much of Darwin's work I feel that I have done plenty of research on the matter and if you have knowledge that I do not it would be kind of you to share. If you know of a quote where Darwin claims that he is out to find an alternative to God, it doesn't seem like it would be difficult for you to cut and paste it for my benefit.
....During these two years (March 1837 - January 1839) I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being heartily laughed at by several officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come by this time (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see the Old Testament, from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rain-bow as a sign, &c., &c., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian....
....Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother, and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished.
And this is a damnable doctrine....
At present the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons. But it cannot be doubted that Hindoos, Mahomedans and others might argue in the same manner and with equal force in favour of the existence of one God, or of many Gods, or as with the Buddhists of no God...
....This argument would be a valid one, if all men of all races had the same inward conviction of the existence of one God; but we know this is very far from being the case. Therefore I cannot see that such inward convictions and feelings are of any weight as evidence of what really exists....
Thus Darwin created evolution. I know there are more quotes... I just don't really have time to dig 'em up... I will try...

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
....During these two years (March 1837 - January 1839) I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being heartily laughed at by several officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come by this time (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see the Old Testament, from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rain-bow as a sign, &c., &c., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian....
....Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother, and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished.
And this is a damnable doctrine....
At present the most usual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from deep inward conviction and feelings which are experienced by most persons. But it cannot be doubted that Hindoos, Mahomedans and others might argue in the same manner and with equal force in favour of the existence of one God, or of many Gods, or as with the Buddhists of no God...
....This argument would be a valid one, if all men of all races had the same inward conviction of the existence of one God; but we know this is very far from being the case. Therefore I cannot see that such inward convictions and feelings are of any weight as evidence of what really exists....
Thus Darwin created evolution. I know there are more quotes... I just don't really have time to dig 'em up... I will try...
Once again you have shown Darwin's struggle with his own findings and not an attempt to find an alternative to God.

 

[jerthunter]

Come on people. Word mean things. If you say you have proof or say that someone said something, please provide the evidence and not something totally unrelated.

 

[deltablack22]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
They are similarities, the significance of which is up for debate. I personally do not feel they serve as a good point of discussion however someone insisited making a statement about 'apes with gills' I merely pointed out this similarity.
The only similarites they share are from a visually imaginative mind. Much like seeing faces in the clouds, this proves no relation from one to the other. The statement you were referring to (apes and gills) was a joke to begin with.

 

[clown boy]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Ok, so he created Lucifer, but evil must have been present for Lucifer to chose to rebel. Also, if you claim that Lucifer rebeled and created evil than God did not create everything and therefore there would have to be multiple creators.
According to Noah Webster, evil is:
"Having bad qualities of a moral kind; wicked; corrupt; perverse; wrong"
It's not really something that is "created" in the sense that you are speaking of.

 

[reefreak29]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
According to Noah Webster, evil is:
"Having bad qualities of a moral kind; wicked; corrupt; perverse; wrong"
It's not really something that is "created" in the sense that you are speaking of.
yes true very hard to explain imo , God is not evil so he didnt create evil but he allowed for the posibility for evil to exsist but man made it factual

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by DeltaBlack22
The only similarites they share are from a visually imaginative mind. Much like seeing faces in the clouds, this proves no relation from one to the other.
Again, I was not trying to prove a relation by mentioning that fact.
The most interesting similarities to me are the ones we cannot see with the

[hr]
eye. However I have to say the visual observations have done well for people in the past who did not have the means to view the intraworkings of the cell. Mendel based his laws of heredity on what he could see. We now know he was very accurate in his hypothesis because we know about genes and chromosomes now.
Sometimes when things look similar it becomes a good idea to investigate further and not just say, 'oh thats just your imagination.'

 

[darknes]

Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Many christians do not believe in free will, but I suppose you do which is fine. However if God created everything that would mean he created evil and gave man the chance to choose it. So it seem logical to claim that God created evil. Could not have God created man but not have created evil and still give man freewill?
I don't believe in evil. I believe in good and absence of good. To explain this, think of heat; cold doesn't really exist as anything, it's merely the absence of heat (there is either heat or lack of it).
God is pure "good". Everything he is and does is good. Anything that we suppose to be "evil" is really just an absence of God. He never created evil. We create this evil (absence of good) by turning from God through our free will.
(Not sure if any of that made sense

)

 

[jerthunter]

Originally Posted by Clown Boy
According to Noah Webster, evil is:
"Having bad qualities of a moral kind; wicked; corrupt; perverse; wrong"
It's not really something that is "created" in the sense that you are speaking of.
So are you saying the evil is quality that is independent of creation?