Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

Is there a Superior race? Through the wormhole


SocalDinar
 Share

Recommended Posts

The rolling of the dye was a terrible stupid illustration.  Mainly because God has already established a formula for our DNA.  The use that one makes of the brain may determine the next stage of our advancement or decline, but that is determined by how we use our brain in the present environment.  With our tech. advancement, our brains may be moving backward.  

 

I love science.  I'm a believer in God, and that God created all the different species in all the created worlds. There may be vastly different species and brain functions within His creation.  It may be so in this world.  But no one knows that at this point in time.  Science is just beginning its search and what they will find may be astonishing, wonderful, and frightening.  

What I do know is that mankind was created in God's image (not physical).  God placed in all species the ability to adapt and change, grow and decline, but not the change from one species to another.  

If you want to know how the mind of man/woman works, you are not going to find out by studying the brain of a fly, or snake, of pig, of chimp!  You will find out by studying the mind of the human species.  Seems to me that a lot of money is for research is being flushed down the scientific toilet when a "scientist" is trying to find out about man's brain by studying a butterfly.  Let him study the human species.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep! Is is a pip.  

I've been reading some of the "new atheist" writers and watching their videos concerning the intellect of man.  Thing is, they state it in such a hubris manner I get to laughing at them and the way they make their arguments, that I forget what they are trying to prove or deny.  

 

Funny stuff.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I like the dinosaur stuff.  The skin colors on some of them are extremely creative.  DNA is more like a butterfly than a reptile.   Makes you wonder what type of suits ancient man wore.  Instead of "bear" they might have had bright yellow and red dinosaur jackets.    :eyebrows::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And God said be fruitful and multiply........  And the Lord must have been thinking that since your kids will only have each other they will have to figure a way to multiply on there own outside of the Garden. And thus came the term brotherly and sisterly love.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except the command  to "be fruitful and multiply" was given them while they were still in Paradise (Gn 1:28).  It is possible that the whole earth may have been destined to be like the Garden of Eden God made  at that time. Since in the Garden there was no progression of time and age as we know it, and Adam and Eve started working to populate the world, there could have been a long period of brother-sister, aunts-uncles, cousins, cousin's cousins, etc. for a long period. No pain in child birth, no death, no contraceptives, no shame!  Boom!  Big population!  

It was only after Adam and Eve sinned by not trusting in God that the world world got messed up: no more Garden Life, death came to everything, pain in childbirth, ground wouldn't produce, people had to work hard to stay alive, and mankind stated taking advantage of those around him, etc.  A cascade of terrible things came into being and mankind started acting without God.  We are still trying to do things our own way, and we are making life more and more difficult for ourselves.  We even have Bob mating with Jack, Jill with Sharon, and Crosby with Nash!  

The world is moving in a direction farther away from it's Creator, and the direction is not back to the Garden!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But where did Cains wives come from? 

 

There were not the problems in genetics then as there are now.  

In Genesis Jacob was married to his half-sister (Gn 12:13-19) and later so was Abraham (Gn 20:2,5,12).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the major admission by most evolutionary theorists is the fact attested by paleontologists everywhere that "transitional life forms DO NOT EXIST !" it is the reason they all descend to fanciful theories that require more faith than " In the beginning GOD..."

 

directed pan-spermia:    long long ago in a galaxy far far away little aliens put the seeds of life into a rocket and blasted them off into the universe where they landed in the primordial goo of earth and then voila from the goo to the zoo to you !!

 

punctuated equilibrium: the first bird hatched from a snake's egg...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genetics change? Do you mean we evolved?

Certainly we evolve!  We change.  We just do not change from one species to another.  Animals are one "kind" and humans are another "kind."  There are no transitional movements from one kind to another kind.  

The changes (micro-evolution) can be seen within humans, but no transition from human to animal.  There is micro-evolution within horses, reptiles, birds, fish, etc., but no transitional record in biology, archeology, or paleontology of any transition from one group (kind) to the other.  That information is the active supposition and fiction of those who "think" it might have happen.  "We think...." or "I assume that it might have happened . . . " "this way."  They must do that because there are no scientific facts that prove that it did happen through mega-evolution (evolving from one species to another).  

 

Yes, we are evolving now as humans.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the major admission by most evolutionary theorists is the fact attested by paleontologists everywhere that "transitional life forms DO NOT EXIST !" it is the reason they all descend to fanciful theories that require more faith than " In the beginning GOD..."

 

directed pan-spermia:    long long ago in a galaxy far far away little aliens put the seeds of life into a rocket and blasted them off into the universe where they landed in the primordial goo of earth and then voila from the goo to the zoo to you !!

 

punctuated equilibrium: the first bird hatched from a snake's egg...  

Hey EE.  Can you just see the first of the process.  A snake crawls out of the eye, looks around for a tree and jumps off.  All the other snakes look at his dead body at the base of the tree and ask, "Hey, what happened to 'Slither'?" "He is dead!"  "Yah.  He crawled up that tree and jumped off.  Now he is dead." "Why did he do that?"  "I don't know, but I know I don't want to die."  

Now this goes on for thousands of year until one day a feather develops from one scale of the snake.  Millions have died trying to jump off rocks, trees, etc. only to die trying.  Another thousand years and now there are two snakes with one or two scales which are beginning to look like feathers.  

 

One morning, millions of years later, there hatched from the egg, not a snake, but a bird!  He has no idea what he is to do.  He's the first bird.  Now, he can't even get up to the limb of the tree to jump.  He can't fly nor can he mate.  

Well, you get the picture.  Mega-evolutionists make up things they think could have happened, but they need millions of years for it to work.  Problem is . . . it's all made up from an active mind that just knows that must have been what happened.  LOL.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"That information is the active supposition and fiction of those who "think" it might have happen.  "We think...." or "I assume that it might have happened . . . " "this way."  They must do that because there are no scientific facts that prove that it did happen through mega-evolution (evolving from one species to another).  "


Pretty sure the same can be said about God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are no winners with this debate so I will kindly bow out..  I was brought up  as a  Lutheran.  Religion was taught to me. Having Faith was nothing more than a lesson taught to me by those that were taught faith by there families. . This is no different than the children of Daesh being taught their religion. No difference at all.  At some point I realized that i could not believe in such things just because someone said it was so.  So much pain and suffering in this world. So much that if there was a God I would chew his but off for being such a cruel deity. If it truly was real why not end world hunger? Why would God let children starve.? Come on really Why?  If its part of his plan...well His plan sucks and he is no better than Your Bibles Lucifer.  Is it some sick sense of humor he has.  I could never worship a cruel and uncaring God that promotes fear.   I would rather worship the sun.  At least I can see the sun. It brings us warmth, It gives us light and it never never judges me.  It also never asks for MONEY

 

How about Joseph Smith.  Do you believe he found tablets of Gold.. I bet you don't believe this . But why? Because you were taught differently. Thats why.

Edited by SocalDinar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do we have an Appendix?  

We had some additions to add to the book.   :shrug:  :eyebrows:

 

Actually we can function without one.  No one seems to know exactly why we have it except when there is an infection in the body the appendix swells in response to it.  It seems to be used by the body as a collector to warn the body of abscess and poisons present in the system. If not taken out when poisons remain, the appendix can burst and fill the body cavity with the infections present.  

 

Why do some people have ear lobes and others don't?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question.  How old is the Earth?

One of the reasons that an old earth (5 billion years) in required is to accommodate the theory of mega-evolution (evolution between species).  Both evolutionists and creationists believe evolution is impossible if the universe is only a few thousand years old.  Apart from the most basic issue of the controversy itself—i.e., whether creation or evolution is the correct view of origins—the single most serious area of conflict between those who accept the biblical account of creation and those who accept the theory of organic evolution (in whole or in part) is the chronological framework of history—viz., the age of the Earth. And, of course, this subject is of intense interest not only to those who promulgate atheistic evolution, but to those who are sympathetic with certain portions of that theory as well. While a young Earth/Universe presents no problem whatsoever for creationists who accept the biblical account at face value, it is the death knell to almost every variety of the evolutionary scenario.

Now if one considers the biblical record, it indicates that the Cosmos was created in six days only a few thousand years ago. In contrast is the suggestion of atheistic evolutionists and theistic evolutionists that the current age of the Cosmos can be set at 8-12 billion years (give or take a couple of billion).  Complicating things further, the biblical record indicates that Christ placed all living things on the earth at creation and that man and woman were created before the end of the six day period. The evolutionary scenario postulates that all life forms gradually developed during “geologic ages” of 3.5-4.0 billion years.  Man came along in one form or another, approximately 1-2 million years ago. (It changes with the evolutionary scientist.) The dilemma: there is no possible compromise between the two positions.

I don’t claim to be a scientist.  I am a biblical scholar (student) and teacher. I believe in the God of the Bible; accept the bible as His inspired, authoritative Word; and I am convinced by evidence that what God revealed in the Bible is true and can be understood.  Since the Creator is the Author of the Bible, I trust whenever it speaks on any subject, including creation, that it is accurate in what it says. 

Since there is a seeming contradiction between the theories and postulations of evolutionary science and what the Creator has authored, I will trust God who does not contradict, over a science that does contradict. .  

What we have revealed in the Bible is the history of man from the time of God's creation of Adam and Eve.  We do have around 6 to 10 thousand years of history of man.  However, going by the history recorded in Scripture, mankind is 5 days younger than the earth.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"That information is the active supposition and fiction of those who "think" it might have happen.  "We think...." or "I assume that it might have happened . . . " "this way."  They must do that because there are no scientific facts that prove that it did happen through mega-evolution (evolving from one species to another).  "

Pretty sure the same can be said about God.

 

Actually to most atheist and agnostics God is a myth and not worthy to be considered in the discussion.  Belief in God has been under attack since the beginning of time. It's not new.  What is new is a militant atheism which has as it's goal the elimination of belief in God.

"The world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious belief ... ." 

"Anything we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization."--Stephen Weinberg in "A Free-for-All on Science and Religion," by George Johnson, Science Times, November 21, 2006.

"[Dawkins] wants to make respect for belief in God socially unacceptable ... ." 

"I'm quite keen on the politics of persuading people of the virtues of atheism ... ." 

"Highly intelligent people are mostly atheists."--Richard Dawkins

"Harris argues that unless belief in God is eradicated, civilization is likely to end in a murderous sea of religious warfare ... ." 

"At some point, there's going to be enough pressure that it is just going to be too embarrassing to believe in God."--Sam Harris

 

They get worse in some of their writings.  They are not stupid men, just ignorant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO the man with an experience in GOD is never at the mercy of the man with a theory, theology or lack thereof....having had now 45 years of experiences that are clearly to me the Hand of the Almighty at work in my life...I can only add when I became a Christian I did not check my brains at the door...I checked my heart....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO the man with an experience in GOD is never at the mercy of the man with a theory, theology or lack thereof....having had now 45 years of experiences that are clearly to me the Hand of the Almighty at work in my life...I can only add when I became a Christian I did not check my brains at the door...I checked my heart....

 

 

We are created in --the image of God. This includes, among other attributes, the ability to reason.

Thus, this entails the value of evidence and reason considered that motivates, inspires, and changes the heart. As Charles Hodge informs us, 
"If the contents of the Bible did not correspond with the truths which God has revealed in his external works and the constitution of our nature, it could not be received as coming from Him, for God cannot contradict himself. Nothing, therefore, can be more derogatory to the Bible than the assertion that its doctrines are contrary to reason. The assumption that reason and faith are incompatible; that we must become irrational in order to become believers is, however it may be intended, the language of infidelity; for faith in the irrational is of necessity itself irrational.... We can believe only what we know, i.e., what we intelligently apprehend."

 

It seems quite popular today to hold that religious beliefs have nothing in common with reasoned inquiry and stand immune to proof or disproof. A few years ago a major newspaper stated, “Systems of belief and tenets of faith are powerful in men’s minds, but, by their very nature, do not lend themselves to proof.”  Another statement along the same lines: “Faith is belief without reason.  Religions oppose rational processes.”  I reject both these interpretations of the nature of the Christian faith.  I could never encourage anyone to accept the Christian religion against the weight of the evidence.  It is my conviction that a person has nothing to gain by adhering to a falsehood, regardless of how comfortable or sacred.  Any thought that an individual must suspend or renounce the use of reason in Christian faith is a contradiction.  To advocate that faith in God and His word is irrational is itself irrational.  The tendency to redefine faith as the acceptance of things for which there is no proof is both contradictory to and destructive of the Christian faith.  There are some writers who speak in glowing terms and advocate a “leap of faith,” by which the individual accepts what his reason thinks is unsupported or unsupportable, is irrational and unchristian.

Faith sustained throughout the Bible is against shallow, emotional commitments and promotes commitments that are considered and rational. "Faith is being sure of what we hoped for and the certainty (evidence) of what we do not see." (Heb 11:1)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.