FAITH in a RELIGION for those who REFUSE FACTS.

Now, now...no cause to be insulting.

AboveAlpha

 

no comment

 

Where? Point to the line you are talking abput

 

nonsense.

I said there were eggs before there were chickens.

And

From your evolutionary perspective, which ya has failed to think thru..

There was no first chicken, just successive generations more like todays chicken than preceding ones.

Bird type A lays egg that hatches into bird type B.

The egg came before B.

 

Well, if you say so, but there is still some communication breakdown, argumentative for the sake of argument. Maybe you're just not there yet. You'll get there, though. It'll dawn on you, you'll see the light, then you'll know what is a day.

 

What is unprincipled about agnosticism?

 

You display principle by declaring you know things that nobody can know dont you know?

 

I had no idea.

 

A better question is: which came first, the very first egg of any kind or the very first creature to lay an egg?

If the egg came first then why do creatures lay eggs that hatch into more creatures that lay eggs?

 

the ancestors of mammals laid eggs.

 

This is some tortured logic. You're really suggesting that chickens used to produce asexually?

 

It would be amazing to see the very first creature that produced an egg and the first male of any kind.

 

It can’t be said that you never miss a beat.

B-b-b-b-ut scherado, what is your evidence for this statement?

Dear Not-A-But-THEbrucebeat, you have not processed the words ‘by default’, that is, their meaning; and, in particular, when they are bounded by the two words....which bound them.

Beat misser!!

 

I think that would probably be like seeing the very first person who spoke french.

 

No...what I am saying is that Chickens came into being by the Evolutionary Process so if we follow this process back in time we will come to a point where Chickens as well as all life on Earth came from a Single Celled Organism that reproduced via MITOSIS.

Thus in effect...the Chicken came before the EGG.

AboveAlpha

 

Noah may be collect the DNA samples to bring to the boat, not necessaily the physical bodies. The Ark could be a DNA vault.

 

Well...since the Great Flood actually happened in 5600 BC...I don't see how Noah over 7600 years ago would have the tech. to do this.

As well it would take a crew of 100,000 people approx. 1000 years to collect DNA samples from every land based life form on Earth and even then the chances they could find them all or be able to travel to everywhere on the globe is ridiculous.

As well the Great Flood could not cover the entire globe as the Great Flood was the Med. Sea from the Aegean area flooding into the Lower Sea Leveled Fresh Water...Black Sea as this just flooded the surrounding areas of the Black Sea many miles inland for about 300 days.

AboveAlpha

 

Even if that's true about the Black Sea it's still a long way from the Middle East where Noah was supposedly from. So maybe Noah was a Turk, Greek, Russian, or Bulgarian. http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/infopage/blacksea.htm

 

Wow! I didn't know that several religious people have decided to believe in evolution... it is weird their choice to become ignorants. (who believes the incoherences mixed with important information found in wikipedia anyway...)

- - - Updated - - -

Your circle of friends must be very small then...

 

Reading the message above, no wonder why the US is far low in IQ compared with other countries

OK, lets go to the point.

One sentence alone.

In the beginning elohim created heavens and earth.

No need to prove the existence of elohim, because such is not possible... but, prove the existence of the universe by a method other than creation. Give your best shot. Be sure that you won't write nonsenses, and when I say "prove it" you must have a scientific explanation that can't be challenged by a more accurate one, or that have flaws in it. Your explanation must be verifiable.

Go ahead.

 

that is dumb. chickens dont do no mitosizings, they lay aigs.

 

My Theravada Buddhist friends also ask - 'Chicken or egg?'. The topic of evolution has also come up in conversation. All believe in evolution, not because they are Buddhist, but because they are educated.

 

Wow. That is really something. A trailer-park style creationist
talking about how its someone else who represents the low achievement
anti intellectual, regressive element is American culture!

The amused contempt of educated Asians for American fundies
should be a national embarrassment and a call to smarten up,

I dont think you have the faintest clue about what is behind Hong Kong ranking highest in IQ, and fundamentalisms appeal to the lowest
IQ / education / income group in America.

- - - Updated - - -

zactly

 

I agree with you that any religious person that believes the bible is the word of God, should believe that the bible is true. I have seen some tortured explanations about the 6 days being time periods of thousands or millions of years, but this neglects the events of each day. Plants can not live without sunlight for a thousand or a million years, but they could survive one day.
John 5:46-47 says: "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"
In Exodus 20:11 Moses said: "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it"
Which also brings up the question, is the sabbath day supposed to be a million years long too? Of course we know it is an actual 24 hour day in context.

As for the flood I'm not sure about this one if you are a believer. Too many cultures have a world wide flood story for this to have been a local flood as some people try to reconcile, yet the facts of the story don't exactly make sense with our understanding of the world. As you point out, taking 2 of every animal on earth would have been hugely time consuming. The book of Enoch offers an explanation that is consistent with things hinted at in the bible. According to "Enoch", after the flood the animals (that seemed to be mostly animals that would have been common in the ME at the time) began to have offspring unlike themselves. Cows gave rise to elephants and less familiar animals and so on. This is similar to the idea of punctuated equilibrium which postulates that some environment altering events can trigger cladogenesis from a species that is normally stable or in a state of genetic stasis, but the time periods would have been much shorter.
The amount of water needed is another good point. I don't have a strong biblical explanation for this. I have seen some interesting extrabiblical theories about an expanding earth (one time event, not the theory from the 60's), but nothing particularly compelling.

Sorry for the rambling, my main point is that any Christian should believe in the validity of their "holy text" if they believe that text to be divinely inspired. Creationism may seem silly, but it also seems more logically consistent in some ways than people who try to compromise what they believe with what they see.

 

If you prefer to hear it from the horse’s mouth, here's from the Vatican's website: http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...th_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html

And just to add my Churches position as an example for the many Protestant Churches that embrace theistic evolution: http://www.ekd.de/english/download/ekd94engl.pdf

Face it: creationism is a minority view among Christians. That’s a fact!