'First human' discovered in Ethiopia

[AgeofKnowledge]

Red herring. This is an informal forum which means we aren't required to adhere to APA, MLA, or formal publishing guidelines. If you want a source, simply ask and I'll provide it though I often do anyways.

And yes I do understand it. You're making another false assertion here. A person certainly can understand something from learning about it without having to invent or discover it themselves. It's a function of education. I have two master's degrees, a bachelor's of science degree, numerous technical and science certifications, etc... Now what university major did you graduate with again? We're still waiting on that information from you?

But you asserted mathematical zero with respect to Einstein's cosmological constant so why are you suddenly changing your tune?

And this response just so happens to contain various lines verbatim from another site? lol you really understand your stuff don't you!

Einstein's cosmological constant (as originally written) was debunked by Hubble's findings years ago, and regardless its not to do with (relative, not rest) gravitational potentiality against kinetic energy, its to do with the second law of thermodynamics in regards to total energy conservation in an unexpanding universe. Einstein's equation didn't account for the expansion.

What are YOUR credentials?? lol

 

[PennEd]

I don't have to be a creationist. Most Christians believe in evolution.

I don't believe that was the question he asked. What is the purpose of you seeking this site out, creating an account, and spending your time here as an unbelieving 25 yr old on a Saturday night? Don't get me wrong, we are glad your'e here. God has a plan for you, and maybe part of that plan is receiving the Gospel here.

Have you ever lied? Then you are a liar. Have you ever taken ANYTHING that wasn't yours? Then you are a thief.... Yes these and many other faults of men are called sins, and ALL of us have sinned. A Holy, Just God cannot be in sins presence. The law is unflexible. If you drive over the posted speed limit you have broken the law. An officer or court may show you mercy and forgive, or let you go, but you still broke the law. The penalty (or debt) for breaking God's law is eternal separation from Him which is hell. ALL debts MUST be paid by someone. For instance, I might lend you $100, and later say you don't have to pay it back. I, in essence, paid YOUR debt.
So a Holy, JUST God knew the ONLY way our sin debt could be paid is if He Himself paid for it. He loves us so much that He put ALL of our sins, yours, mine,everyone's, on His Son Jesus Christ.

Romans 10 : 9-109 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

May God Bless you and let you not rest til you rest in Him.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

you would not see a believer, if he stared you in the face.

i was crying because they killed lucy.

Awh, don't be sad, it was just a pigmy of their imagination.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Yes. I never said that atheism and evolution were the same thing although certainly atheistic evolutionary models exist and are supported by atheists in contrast to theistic evolutionary models and their proponents.

But certainly general evolutionary theory does include and address origin (e.g. origin of life, origin of humanity, etc...) theories so you're making a false assertion in stating that it doesn't.

And state atheism certainly was the official metaphysical worldview of the Soviet Union which engaged in sweeping persecution and democide of non-atheists across their empire in the 20th century. That's a documented, proven, historical fact.

If you're looking to learn about Hitler and God, I recommend you start here: Was Adolf Hitler a Christian? - a report on How Hitler Viewed God - The 700 Club | CBN.com

As I've already stated repeatedly and will continue to repeat repeatedly, painting creationism as YEC is disingenuous for the simple reason that there are several competing creation models in the Christian worldview.

Though, like you, I don't align with YEC various peer-reviewed creation journals now exist around the model. An example would be the 'Journal of Creation.'

AgeofKnowledge, you are aware that evolution and atheism aren't the same thing, right?

Atheism is not a fundamental tenant of evolution and evolution isn't required for one to lack belief in God. More importantly, the Soviet Union may have disdained religion but that doesn't mean atheism was the cause, which is something you keep alluding to. That's like saying "Mustached Hitler and blue eyed, white skinned, Nazis are the reason for WWII". Oh, by the way, Hitler professed belief in God and was incredibly anti-secularism. So should I go around pretending Christianity is the core tenant of Nazism? Of course not!



Grand! Because the theory of evolution is about speciation, not the origins of life.



There aren't any recent peer reviewed articles supporting YEC that isn't wrapped in fraud. And none of the peer reviewed articles currently support OEC, though that's not to say OEC haven't contributed anything to science.



I would love a source for this information.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

More red herrings. They'll go good with those biscuits that scare you. Christians adhere to several competing creation models. Pretending like they don't so you can attack creationism via an attack against YEC is disingenuous.

I not a YEC'r or a TEr but I am a genuine educated Christian. When you attempt to discredit creationism through painting all Christians as YECrs and then attacking YEC you are engaging in fallacious argumentation.

When you make false assertions about naturalism, TE, origins of life, etc... you are making false assertions.

And most Christians adhere to sola scripture.

You have a great deal to learn but don't appear interested in doing anything but making false assertions and then refusing to adequately defend them. Which, of course, is called trolling and why you are now banned.

Scary biscuits. Look, most Christians don't even believe in interpreting the creation story in Genesis literally. Theistic evolution is much less frowned upon in the scientific community than Young Earth Creationism but its no less irrelevant to scientific discussion on the mechanics of naturalistic evolution; t's at its core naturalistic evolution with the assertion that God's responsible for sparking it off, and relies more heavily on theological arguments than on scientific ones, on false probabilistic speculations on whether the complexity of organisms can arise through spontaneous means or whether there need be a cosmological guiding hand.

It's irrelevant to the science. Anthropic principle 101.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

In your reductive materialistic atheistic worldview; nothing is ultimately meaningful. So, nothing you say or do is ultimately meaningful within the worldview you adhere to.

You're just a temporary accidental smear of biological matter on a rocky planet, fueled by a dying sun, in an increasingly accelerating universe that will make even the possibility of biological life someday impossible. It's a hopeless state that you mediate with denial.

The truth is, of course, that there IS a creator God who's endowed our mortal bodies with an eternal spirit. And for those of us who have been reborn by a supernatural act of God's Holy Spirit, we have a bright future in dimensions transcending those we presently inhabit.

It's not; however, so fortunate for you atheists obviously as you get to stand before God in a state of spiritual unregeneration for judgment after rejecting His personal sacrificial propitiation for your redemption.

It makes sense to me. I'm a collection of stuff that has always existed, the energy transformations of which have been eternal through stars and planets, who is made of particles of mass and energy that have culminated in the expanse of infinite possibility to create a product of complex energetic interactions capable of staring into the universe it is part of.

If that isn't enough to give you some sense of purpose or meaning, to give you a reason to make your life worth something, to hold dear the other people who are just as extraordinary and rare in this cosmos as you are, then I suppose you need the Abrahamic God, or else it's all just worthless to you.

 

[Percepi]

Yes. I never said that atheism and evolution were the same thing although certainly atheistic evolutionary models exist and are supported by atheists in contrast to theistic evolutionary models and their proponents.

Theistic evolution and atheistic evolution merely describes whether or not a person believes a deity is behind evolution or not. Scientific journals do not measure whether or not deities are involved - both atheist and theist evolutionists agree on what is published in scientific journals. Theistic evolutionists keep God out of the equations until they can figure out a way to prove God is behind theistic evolution through a measurable means rather than through faith. There's no conflict here.

But certainly general evolutionary theory does include and address origin (e.g. origin of life, origin of humanity, etc...) theories so you're making a false assertion in stating that it doesn't.

Abiogenesis is the study regarding the origin of life, not evolution. I'll grant you that the origin of humanity is covered by evolution though.

And state atheism certainly was the official metaphysical worldview of the Soviet Union which engaged in sweeping persecution and democide of non-atheists across their empire in the 20th century. That's a documented, proven, historical fact.

The Soviet Leaders were anti-religion, I'll admit. But you're clearly trying to link atheism to these horrible acts as if this is what atheist ideology revolves around. It doesn't.

If you're looking to learn about Hitler and God, I recommend you start here: Was Adolf Hitler a Christian? - a report on How Hitler Viewed God - The 700 Club | CBN.com

Oh, Hitler wasn't REALLY a Christian because he was a horrible person. Horrible people who profess belief in Jesus as their savior aren't REALLY Christians, only good people can be Christians.

Guess what, the Soviets weren't REAL atheists. A REAL atheist is a person who doesn't believe in God AND supports people's rights to live.

Whatever you want to refer to Hitler as, he professed a belief in Jesus as his savior and was massively anti-secularism and anti-atheism. Even if Hitler isn't a Christian by your definition, he is still a professed Christ follower. So whatever you want to call him, Christian or a fake-Christian, it doesn't change the fact that he used God's name for his own tyrannical oppression and genocide. And that's EXACTLY what the Soviet Union did with atheism. Both of these men took their religious views or views on religion and applied them to their politics.

Whether or not Hitler was a real Christian or not doesn't change the fact that he acted in the name of Christianity. You CAN NOT defend that. And I can't change the fact that the Soviet Union was anti-religious to tyrannical ends. But I know that MOST Christians and MOST atheists do not endorse Nazism or Soviet Communist practices. You, on the other hand, are trying to blur those lines.

So what would an atheist government be like? Well, it depends. You can have a government that goes to war with all religious folks such as the Soviets, or you can have a secular government where everyone is allowed to worship or not as they please, or you can have a government where everyone just so happens to be atheist (which can include both capitalist or communist governments).

Essentially, you're moving the goal posts.

Though, like you, I don't align with YEC various peer-reviewed creation journals now exist around the model. An example would be the 'Journal of Creation.'

The Journal of Creation is not a reputable scientific source. It was published by an institute that is based on the Creation model, meaning it can not be impartial.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Though you were just here to troll, of course, I suggest you benefit from your visit by reading Dr. Edgar Andrews book, 'Who Made God?' as I believe even someone as scientifically illiterate as you've demonstrated yourself to be would be able to at least understand most of it though perhaps not comprehend the ramifications.

P.S. The pre-creation eternity where nothing physical existed and the physical vacuum of space that lies within the created order; origins; and the nature of laws is explained by the biblical hypothesis of a transcendent yet immanent God.

I would argue against your assertion that stuff must have an originating source. Evidence points to the contrary.

 

[ColinCat]

In your reductive materialistic atheistic worldview; nothing is ultimately meaningful. So, nothing you say or do is ultimately meaningful within the worldview you adhere to.

To quote..

Contrary to misconceptions...As an atheist I've got everything live for, I've just got nothing to die for.


Its not truth there is a creator, you believe there is a creator. The two are quite different.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I have to step out and do some work but I'll be back to reply to your posts. Peace.

 

[ColinCat]

I have to step out and do some work but I'll be back to reply to your posts. Peace.

On a Saturday? That's dedication lol

 

[Percepi]

In your reductive materialistic atheistic worldview; nothing is ultimately meaningful. So, nothing you say or do is ultimately meaningful within the worldview you adhere to.

Meaning is a human concept, which makes it relative to our own senses. So to suggest nothing is meaningful to an atheist is wrong.

You're just a temporary accidental smear of biological matter on a rocky planet, fueled by a dying sun, in an increasingly accelerating universe that will make even the possibility of biological life someday impossible. It's a hopeless state that you mediate with denial.

Yes, it sucks that we're eventually going to die. This is why atheists focus on enjoying their life or using what time they have to better the lives of others. Life is temporary, therefore we need to make the best of it while it lasts. We don't need something to last forever, such as life and happiness, for us to enjoy it hear and now.

The truth is, of course, that there IS a creator God who's endowed our mortal bodies with an eternal spirit. And for those of us who have been reborn by a supernatural act of God's Holy Spirit, we have a bright future in dimensions transcending those we presently inhabit.

You could be right. But, you could also be wrong. This logic may make belief in God sound more appealing, but it doesn't make it any more likely or less likely. You're appealing to what people want to believe.

It's not; however, so fortunate for you atheists obviously as you get to stand before God in a state of spiritual unregeneration for judgment after rejecting His personal sacrificial propitiation for your redemption.

Allow me to make a distinction between rejecting something you know is being offered and rejecting something you didn't even know or belief was being offered. There's a tremendous difference between the two.

Imagine if you were bitten by a snake and all you need to do is drink some antidote to prevent your leg from needing amputated. A man nearby starts moving his hands wildly and you tell him to call 9-11. After getting your leg amputated, the man walks into your room and tells you he had antidote that could have cured the poison! Of course, you didn't know that, he was using sign language that you couldn't understand. The man could have spoken plain English, but he told you "I used sign language, you should have known. That was your sign. How much more obvious could it have been?"

Essentially, you're trying to tell atheists that God would reject them because atheists sincerely didn't know of God's existence because for one reason or another, they didn't know the signs. Atheists are being punished for being ignorant. You're okay with this? I also have to ask, are you allowed not to be okay with it? Are you allowed to say, "Hey, God, I disagree with your concept of salvation but I don't want to burn so I'll accept it begrudgingly"?

 

[Tintin]

Actually, many, many Christians do believe God used evolutionary means to create the universe. Being the majority though, doesn't make them right. It's a compromise and fails to show a true understanding of both evolution and God's Word.

 

[CRC]

FOR Bible students, archaeology is useful, since its findings often supplement their knowledge of life, conditions, customs, and languages in Bible times. Archaeology also provides helpful information on the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, such as those predicting the demise of ancient Babylon, Nineveh, and Tyre. (Jeremiah 51:37; Ezekiel 26:4, 12; Zephaniah 2:13-15) The science has its limits, however. Artifacts must be interpreted, and interpretations are subject to human error and modification.
Christian faith depends, not on broken vases, moldering bricks, or crumbling walls, but on the entire, harmonious body of spiritual truth found in the Bible. (2 Corinthians 5:7; Hebrews 11:1) To be sure, the Bible’s internal harmony, candor, fulfilled prophecies, and many other features provide convincing evidence that “all Scripture is inspired of God.” (2 Timothy 3:16)

 

[Tintin]

Champa, I know both sides of the story. While I was raised to believe in a biblical creation etc, I was exposed to evolutionary teachings. They're everywhere! It would be nearly impossible not to be exposed to such beliefs. From the countless TV documentaries and TV series, to school, to children/teenage/adult books, to movies, to museums and zoos - just to name a few. They all teach evolution. You're right, I'm not a scientist, but I've examined both worldviews, both sets of beliefs and have found an evolutionary understanding of origins and anything to be severely wanting. You, yourself, should know that the Big Bang Theory has many, many problems and is no longer a viable piece of evolutionary storytelling. But then again, you can't explain anything purely by naturalistic means, so why bother? It really comes down to people not wanting to include God in the equation. Because being accountable to something greater than yourself, now that would go against everything you've been taught. So, don't give me the bull about me not practicing critical thinking. I'm fairly certain that you haven't properly looked into a biblical creation understanding yourself to see what they really believe and teach.

 

[thisgirl]

creationministries.org For those seeking a Christian scientist perspectives on the myth of evolution and the err in carbon dating "science".

 

[VioletReigns]

What a bummer to be closed minded.

I praise the Lord for giving me freedom to learn and reason and discover. \/

 

[PennEd]

I haven't been regularly active in months. I'm almost never here.

Your'e forum post history would beg to differ with this statement. Which means you should further analyze my earlier post.

 

[Sirk]

Your'e forum post history would beg to differ with this statement. Which means you should further analyze my earlier post.

That would require some humility....a quality that I have yet to witness from her.

 

[maxwel]

And this response just so happens to contain various lines verbatim from another site? lol you really understand your stuff don't you!

Einstein's cosmological constant (as originally written) was debunked by Hubble's findings years ago, and regardless its not to do with (relative, not rest) gravitational potentiality against kinetic energy, its to do with the second law of thermodynamics in regards to total energy conservation in an unexpanding universe. Einstein's equation didn't account for the expansion.

What are YOUR credentials?? lol

Einstein's cosmological constant "as originally written" isn't what ANYBODY is talking about... and even to suggest this is incredibly and intentionally deceptive.

No surprise this guy got banned.