-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Right, then. Hang on.
"Either is a condescending "super smart and superior" genius atheist attitude that frequents Christian sites to try to what? Impress us with a sophisticated vocabulary while simultaneously saying absolutely nothing of substances at all? Maybe to make yourself feel good about….yourself? It makes you seem really sad in my opinion, but at least you are around God and His people I guess. I have asked you a couple questions that never got answered when I first started this site before I knew you were an atheist, but I can’t figure out a logical reason for your comments here other than you just like you make yourself seem smart amidst what you see as unintelligent people. If that’s not your purpose here I would like to know what it really is, because this just makes you seem really pathetic and I honestly feel much pity for you if your life is this sad. Jesus can help that too by the way, and He’s drawing you here for some reason. Please do yourself the biggest favor of your life, drop your foolish pride and seek Him in truth, because you have already demonstrated Romans 1:22 perfectly. Look at that, you can add Bible teacher to your resume."
I had to highlight your last sentence. It serves to demonstrate how bitter and insincere the thrust of your post was. Other than a reflection of your hostile disposition, there's really no reason to have worded your post in such a fashion at all, and you and I both know that. You haven't offended me at all -- you've merely demonstrated what I've consistently observed in this thread. And that, if anything, is pathetic.
"Either is a condescending "super smart and superior" genius atheist attitude that frequents Christian sites to try to what? Impress us with a sophisticated vocabulary while simultaneously saying absolutely nothing of substances at all? Maybe to make yourself feel good about….yourself? It makes you seem really sad in my opinion, but at least you are around God and His people I guess. I have asked you a couple questions that never got answered when I first started this site before I knew you were an atheist, but I can’t figure out a logical reason for your comments here other than you just like you make yourself seem smart amidst what you see as unintelligent people. If that’s not your purpose here I would like to know what it really is, because this just makes you seem really pathetic and I honestly feel much pity for you if your life is this sad. Jesus can help that too by the way, and He’s drawing you here for some reason. Please do yourself the biggest favor of your life, drop your foolish pride and seek Him in truth, because you have already demonstrated Romans 1:22 perfectly. Look at that, you can add Bible teacher to your resume."
I had to highlight your last sentence. It serves to demonstrate how bitter and insincere the thrust of your post was. Other than a reflection of your hostile disposition, there's really no reason to have worded your post in such a fashion at all, and you and I both know that. You haven't offended me at all -- you've merely demonstrated what I've consistently observed in this thread. And that, if anything, is pathetic.
K
Great debate on what's being debated here.Interesting questions and answers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI
First of all, using the Ken Ham model of 'kinds' rather than domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, species is a deliberate effort to compartmentalize organisms in such a way as to attempt to invalidate the theory of evolution by asserting the non-existence of evolutionary progresses that the theory of evolution doesn't assert the existence of.
The mechanism for evolution is mutation and natural selection, which inevitably leads to the furtherance of beneficial mutational changes in a lineage. All lineages took specific paths, furthering specific mutations, in a specific pattern. You are essentially asking for proof that two random species you pluck from thin air evolved into one another as proof of evolutionary theory (horse into dog, for instance), even though the particular lineal evolutions you demand proof for are not the evolutionary lineages that the theory upholds! Understand the nature of the progression of time, and we can apply your request to any historical account.
What you are asking of me is like me saying to you; 'I want you to prove to me that Jesus' resurrection happened before his crucifixion, and if you can't prove it, then Jesus is a made up man'.
It's impossible for me to show you a horse evolving into a cat, because THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
List of transitional forms - RationalWiki
There is a list of transitional fossils, and while yes, of course the number of transitional fossils IS monumental, you request more and more and more, even when clear examples are presented. It is kind of like me taking a photograph every day to prove my life, and you saying 'no, that's not enough, I want two photographs a day', and when I take two photographs a day, you say 'no, I want six photographs a day'. The request will go on forever.
Finding intermediary fossils is not easy, simply BECAUSE of their age. Many are buried very deep underground, have succumbed to weather, tectonic shifts, rising sea levels, erosion, and all the other geological effects of Earth. That isn't to say that thousands don't exist; they do.
Evolutionary theory has got nothing to do with creation, in its proper sense. It only deals with the progression of already established life. And the underpinnings of the theory don't delve into metaphysics, simply because that is not science's purpose, not science's definition, and not science's department.
science
ˈsʌɪəns/
noun
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]
The mechanism for evolution is mutation and natural selection, which inevitably leads to the furtherance of beneficial mutational changes in a lineage. All lineages took specific paths, furthering specific mutations, in a specific pattern. You are essentially asking for proof that two random species you pluck from thin air evolved into one another as proof of evolutionary theory (horse into dog, for instance), even though the particular lineal evolutions you demand proof for are not the evolutionary lineages that the theory upholds! Understand the nature of the progression of time, and we can apply your request to any historical account.
What you are asking of me is like me saying to you; 'I want you to prove to me that Jesus' resurrection happened before his crucifixion, and if you can't prove it, then Jesus is a made up man'.
It's impossible for me to show you a horse evolving into a cat, because THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
List of transitional forms - RationalWiki
There is a list of transitional fossils, and while yes, of course the number of transitional fossils IS monumental, you request more and more and more, even when clear examples are presented. It is kind of like me taking a photograph every day to prove my life, and you saying 'no, that's not enough, I want two photographs a day', and when I take two photographs a day, you say 'no, I want six photographs a day'. The request will go on forever.
Finding intermediary fossils is not easy, simply BECAUSE of their age. Many are buried very deep underground, have succumbed to weather, tectonic shifts, rising sea levels, erosion, and all the other geological effects of Earth. That isn't to say that thousands don't exist; they do.
Again, evolutionary theory is a method to explain a creation without a Creator.
When you boil it down, this is the real thrust of evolution. No God and no rules.
When you boil it down, this is the real thrust of evolution. No God and no rules.
science
ˈsʌɪəns/
noun
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]
- the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
Note the omission of the word 'metaphysical' there?
So, then the idea that nothing exploded in a big bang 18 to 20 billion years ago is not part of the evolutionary scheme? The earth cooled and then torrential rains washed down over rocks and produced a chemical soup that somehow came alive?
In other words, evolution CAN"T explain the origin of species? Charlie got it wrong after all?
In other words, evolution CAN"T explain the origin of species? Charlie got it wrong after all?
Darwin never tried to explain the origin of life. The big bang theory has nothing to do with evolutionary theory, which only deals with established life. Darwin tried to explain the progression of established life and the origin of species, in otherwords, how organisms simply 'became different organisms' or speciated. There is a difference. Darwin wasn't a cosmologist, he was a biologist.
Darwin was also brought up in a Christian environment and contrary to popular opinion, wasn't an atheist nor did he set out to disprove the existence of God. He studied Anglican theology at Cambridge University and intended to become a minister of the church before he embarked on his discoveries about evolutionary theory.
The Big Bang wasn't his department, the progression of established life was.
Darwin was also brought up in a Christian environment and contrary to popular opinion, wasn't an atheist nor did he set out to disprove the existence of God. He studied Anglican theology at Cambridge University and intended to become a minister of the church before he embarked on his discoveries about evolutionary theory.
The Big Bang wasn't his department, the progression of established life was.
Not only does the big bang theory have nothing to do with evolution. It also is not a theory that nothing exploded, and has nothing to do with primordial soup.
The big bang theory deals with the expansion of the universe, all the way back to singularity, which is just the word we use for all the matter in a dense form that it would look like if we reverse the forward progression of the universe's expansion that we have discovered today. There is ample evidence for the bibg bang, and as far as I know, most christians don't really have a problem with it. Big bang theory does not postulate what began the expansion, where all the matter came from in the first place, nor does it have anything to do with abiogenesis. Most christians I know have no qualms accepting the Big Bang Theory. The only difference between me and them is that they claim God did it and I don't make that claim.
The big bang theory deals with the expansion of the universe, all the way back to singularity, which is just the word we use for all the matter in a dense form that it would look like if we reverse the forward progression of the universe's expansion that we have discovered today. There is ample evidence for the bibg bang, and as far as I know, most christians don't really have a problem with it. Big bang theory does not postulate what began the expansion, where all the matter came from in the first place, nor does it have anything to do with abiogenesis. Most christians I know have no qualms accepting the Big Bang Theory. The only difference between me and them is that they claim God did it and I don't make that claim.
A
Hmm? So those people who converted to the Mormon faith and to the Jehovah's Witnesses within my family were all converted by the Holy Spirit? No? The Holy Spirit only converts people to true Christianity? 
Sorry, but from the atheist stand point there is no Holy Spirit. What I see is people being converted by charismatic purveyors of a new religious message -- new, at least, to those who are converted.
Sorry, but from the atheist stand point there is no Holy Spirit. What I see is people being converted by charismatic purveyors of a new religious message -- new, at least, to those who are converted.
2. yes
That's very much what I thought, and to me and I'll try to be a little nicer, that's sad. You come to parade your "sophisticated vocabulary" and look down your nose at the dumb Christians for "Entertainment". Not a very noble or impressive cause if you ask me. Even in my most wild drug fueled, anger filled, not give a (care in the world), atheistic, what you see is what there is, religion was a man made system to control weaker men, punch you in the face for looking at me wrong days, I would have told you the same thing only in a much more "colorful" manner. Is this really the best way possible you have to use your time? That sister is sad, but I think that you may just be here because He wants you here. Admit it there is something about us irrational, delusional, ignorant Christians you just can't resist. You know you love Jesus, admit it. Seriously though I've seen a bunch of things in this life and there is more to it than what the TV and School tell you. Keep hanging around, you might just learn something really important.
T
I do have to shake my head at some of the things some Christians say/believe about evolution and how it works. The whole 'if humans evolved from apes, why do we still have apes?' question and many others just show a seriously uninformed understanding of evolution. I think one needs to study this stuff to a degree to understand it. I'm not a science type at all but I'm interested in this stuff and in thinking critically.
I was taught evolution at school (it was a state mandate, despite the fact that I attended two Christian schools). I was taught evolution at school, at the movies, on TV, at museums, zoos, gardens, in books, magazines, music etc - the list goes on. Most churches in Australia are fluffy on the early chapters of Genesis - they don't want to seem to side with either the evolution or biblical creation worldview, but from my experience they definitely have the mindset of paying tribute to theistic evolution. I was brought up with a biblical creation understanding.
People here know my opinion of evolution but I heard both sides of the story before making a decision what to believe. And I found evolution wanting, even as a young child. It struck me as complete and utter nonsense and the prophets of evolution (sorry, scientists/philosophers) seem to change their tune more often than some people change their underwear!
I was taught evolution at school (it was a state mandate, despite the fact that I attended two Christian schools). I was taught evolution at school, at the movies, on TV, at museums, zoos, gardens, in books, magazines, music etc - the list goes on. Most churches in Australia are fluffy on the early chapters of Genesis - they don't want to seem to side with either the evolution or biblical creation worldview, but from my experience they definitely have the mindset of paying tribute to theistic evolution. I was brought up with a biblical creation understanding.
People here know my opinion of evolution but I heard both sides of the story before making a decision what to believe. And I found evolution wanting, even as a young child. It struck me as complete and utter nonsense and the prophets of evolution (sorry, scientists/philosophers) seem to change their tune more often than some people change their underwear!
Two others before me have had a whack at explaining to you how you got it wrong. I might as well chime in as well. Keep in mind that Darwin was discussing biological evolution that came about once life forms were already established. He never addressed the origin of life, only its evolution. So did Darwin get it wrong? No. You can't get wrong what your are not addressing in the first place.
You, on the other hand, appear quite befuddled. You don't seem to understand what evolution is about. Allow me to come to your defense though. Astronomers do often talk about the evolution of stars and galaxies. To understand their meaning you have to know something about astronomy, but I am not sure you have that background either. I have discussed this issue with other conservative Christians, so just know that you are not alone in your confusion.
You, on the other hand, appear quite befuddled. You don't seem to understand what evolution is about. Allow me to come to your defense though. Astronomers do often talk about the evolution of stars and galaxies. To understand their meaning you have to know something about astronomy, but I am not sure you have that background either. I have discussed this issue with other conservative Christians, so just know that you are not alone in your confusion.