-
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.
You need to support this statement or recant. Not doing either means you are a slanderer.
1 Cor. 6:9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Cor. 6:9 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
@ Kerry
This is an explanation for why god doesn't intervene, but it's not perfect. I'm going to copy and paste something I've said in a different post here . . .
If you knew a woman was going to walk down a street and a guy hiding in a dark alley was going to rape her, would you save her? . . . Would you tell her and force her to go a different way and protect her? . . . You'd be taking away her free-will, but you'd be saving her. Why can't god do the same? You wouldn't complain if fire-men came and saved your home form burning down. In the same way, if god would just do something to help those who COULD be helped, I would not complain . . . the thing is that god really doesn't do this, which leads on and on to me believing he must not be there at all. God doesn't help, god's not real.
That's my answer
@ Karraster
Just joking and trolling, don't mind me
@ P-MAN /2Thewaters
These two gentlemen are far bigger trolls than I and are just spouting horrible evidence everywhere.
This is an explanation for why god doesn't intervene, but it's not perfect. I'm going to copy and paste something I've said in a different post here . . .
If you knew a woman was going to walk down a street and a guy hiding in a dark alley was going to rape her, would you save her? . . . Would you tell her and force her to go a different way and protect her? . . . You'd be taking away her free-will, but you'd be saving her. Why can't god do the same? You wouldn't complain if fire-men came and saved your home form burning down. In the same way, if god would just do something to help those who COULD be helped, I would not complain . . . the thing is that god really doesn't do this, which leads on and on to me believing he must not be there at all. God doesn't help, god's not real.
That's my answer
@ Karraster
Just joking and trolling, don't mind me
@ P-MAN /2Thewaters
These two gentlemen are far bigger trolls than I and are just spouting horrible evidence everywhere.
you got nuthin'you don't know how life "evolved" into species either.
you need eons and eons and billions of years...but guess what?
that's STILL not enough time
"Hu and Knox both note that the method is not as straightforward as it may seem. Uncertainty in the expansion rate or the density of matter or energy might change the size of hot and cold spots, making it difficult to calculate cosmic age from these features. "But the interesting thing is that all these rather large uncertainties just happen to cancel," says Hu.
That cancellation only occurs, however, under the assumption that the universe has just enough matter and energy to keep it perfectly flat, a geometry in which parallel lines never meet. Several lines of evidence support the assumption.
"We conclude that the best determination of [the age] now comes from cosmic- microwave-background data," Knox's team asserts."
Age Of Universe
can you tell me if you see anything wrong with the above?
also; what explanation is given for a uniform "expansion"?
as well; astrophysical gravitational attraction - true or false? proven or hypothesis?
....
this won't take long to glance through: can you tell me what is wrong with it?
it's found in one word
- (which proves the evolutionists are hardly in agreement) - which cancels everything. SHOWS OVER - i want my money backhttp://www2.astro.psu.edu/~caryl/a480/lecture33.pdf
if you agree, then, can you tell me if Ned Wright's assumption re: mass are proven?
Anyway, I think you'll be able to find what you're looking for in these. IF there's any problem or you need a question answered or whatever, let me know.
P.S. Still waiting for that silver bullet to make a hole in me.
P.S. Still waiting for that silver bullet to make a hole in me.
no silver bullet until we decide what the photons are actually doing
but here's a hint:
Last edited:
hi Jredfox4111....what was haywire with Uncle Erasmus' Laws?
Title: Zoonomia, Vol. I
Or, the Laws of Organic Life
Author: Erasmus Darwin
Zoonomia, or the Laws of Organic Life.
did we discard him completely?
no, we did not.
Title: Zoonomia, Vol. I
Or, the Laws of Organic Life
Author: Erasmus Darwin
Zoonomia, or the Laws of Organic Life.
did we discard him completely?
no, we did not.
@ zone
you got nuthin'
you don't know how life "evolved" into species either.
you need eons and eons and billions of years...but guess what?
that's STILL not enough time
Well that's the thing, 'zone,' we do know how species evolve and adapt and change over millions of years. Natural selection. And I don't understand how all that time isn't enough? . . .
No, I don't see anything wrong . . . Of course I'm no astrophysicist, so . . . I'm guessing there is something allegedly wrong with it though, right? . . .
I PERSONALLY do not know.
This is some in-depth stuff that, once again, I'm not equipped to judge on. I frankly don't know.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm . . . alright, can't wait. I don't know what the photons are doing other than partying with the neutrons in the nucleus.
you got nuthin'you don't know how life "evolved" into species either.
you need eons and eons and billions of years...but guess what?
that's STILL not enough time
No, I don't see anything wrong . . . Of course I'm no astrophysicist, so . . . I'm guessing there is something allegedly wrong with it though, right? . . .
I PERSONALLY do not know.
This is some in-depth stuff that, once again, I'm not equipped to judge on. I frankly don't know.
okay. thank you.
no silver bullet until we decide what the photons are actually doing
but here's a hint:
no silver bullet until we decide what the photons are actually doing
but here's a hint:
natural selection?
survival of the fittest?
you know that?
one authoritative link please
and one link proving on species is evolving into another.
this natural selection should be visible today.
i should be able to look around and see missing links walking around.
the world around us should be a marvel of creatures in varying stages of evolution - where are they?
or, do i need to wait until The Next Million Years?
Charles Galton Darwin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
well, because what we have; empirically is an ordered/orderly system.
we have a perfectly maintained jewel on which we reside.
it has seasons; and life cycles that are orderly, not accidental.
do you believe (in the eons and eons of time) that this is a temporary accidental epoch in which everything came to together perfectly to sustain life, and life abundantly...yet will devolve into chaos again?
that's your first option, since this is all accidental.
the other, is that according to the law of natural selection, we are evolving into an "accidental" super-order.
so we are:
1) enjoying a temporarily awesome; though under a mathematically incalculable probability that we would be what we are, instead of any other one of mathematically incalculable scenarios which should, or could have happened; but very fortunate epoch where stuff just worked out and here we are speaking to one another using language and thought to express ideas; and we feel emotions and are very seriously amazingly advance Amoeba....
2) evolving into super beings; highly advanced - which no one is able to predict based on the theory of natural selection (i.e: we will one day no longer require eyes because we.....(?)
3) devolving and atrophying back into a chaotic; possibly primordial soup mix
4) unknown
lol...k.
survival of the fittest?
you know that?
one authoritative link please
and one link proving on species is evolving into another.
this natural selection should be visible today.
i should be able to look around and see missing links walking around.
the world around us should be a marvel of creatures in varying stages of evolution - where are they?
or, do i need to wait until The Next Million Years?
Charles Galton Darwin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
well, because what we have; empirically is an ordered/orderly system.
we have a perfectly maintained jewel on which we reside.
it has seasons; and life cycles that are orderly, not accidental.
do you believe (in the eons and eons of time) that this is a temporary accidental epoch in which everything came to together perfectly to sustain life, and life abundantly...yet will devolve into chaos again?
that's your first option, since this is all accidental.
the other, is that according to the law of natural selection, we are evolving into an "accidental" super-order.
so we are:
1) enjoying a temporarily awesome; though under a mathematically incalculable probability that we would be what we are, instead of any other one of mathematically incalculable scenarios which should, or could have happened; but very fortunate epoch where stuff just worked out and here we are speaking to one another using language and thought to express ideas; and we feel emotions and are very seriously amazingly advance Amoeba....
2) evolving into super beings; highly advanced - which no one is able to predict based on the theory of natural selection (i.e: we will one day no longer require eyes because we.....(?)
3) devolving and atrophying back into a chaotic; possibly primordial soup mix
4) unknown
lol...k.
Nothing from nothing leaves nothing
evolution is a theory to put faith in for those who don't wish to give themselves over to God
even in the theory itself they search for what created the first things big bang or whatever
God created everything
You can put your faith in a theory first thought up by a fellow who once found a frog like creature in the desert and then drowned it because hey it was frog like so it should have liked water
here is the best part ole Darwin did not just drown one desert reptile but all he found
then concluded hmmmm maybe they don't live in water
I would have concluded that by seeing it crawling in the desert
As for me my faith is in God alone
faith in man is foolish
he once thought the world flat
he once thought flight impossible
he once thought Pluto a planet
he now thinks ape became man or whatever
God has never been wrong
that's where my faith is being placed
evolution is a theory to put faith in for those who don't wish to give themselves over to God
even in the theory itself they search for what created the first things big bang or whatever
God created everything
You can put your faith in a theory first thought up by a fellow who once found a frog like creature in the desert and then drowned it because hey it was frog like so it should have liked water
here is the best part ole Darwin did not just drown one desert reptile but all he found
then concluded hmmmm maybe they don't live in water
I would have concluded that by seeing it crawling in the desert
As for me my faith is in God alone
faith in man is foolish
he once thought the world flat
he once thought flight impossible
he once thought Pluto a planet
he now thinks ape became man or whatever
God has never been wrong
that's where my faith is being placed
@ buckets
♪"You gotta have something if ya wanna be with me."♫
1.) -- This isn't some conspiracy where people start to think evolution true so they don't have to believe in god and then go out and do whatever they want . . .
2.) -- Evolution isn't concerned with first causes or creation, but with how species adapt and change over time.
Please provide EVIDENCE, not arguments against evolution.
This has nothing to do with evolution.
That's fine and good.
This is a great example of science improving and becoming more and more precise. The first two 'examples' happened before the advent of the scientific method, so, really, they're comparable to giants and other folk-explanations.
And as for god being always right . . . well . . . that's a matter of faith and really can't be argued against since you're going to be super-adamant about it.
♪"You gotta have something if ya wanna be with me."♫
1.) -- This isn't some conspiracy where people start to think evolution true so they don't have to believe in god and then go out and do whatever they want . . .
2.) -- Evolution isn't concerned with first causes or creation, but with how species adapt and change over time.
Please provide EVIDENCE, not arguments against evolution.
This has nothing to do with evolution.
That's fine and good.
This is a great example of science improving and becoming more and more precise. The first two 'examples' happened before the advent of the scientific method, so, really, they're comparable to giants and other folk-explanations.
And as for god being always right . . . well . . . that's a matter of faith and really can't be argued against since you're going to be super-adamant about it.
@ zone
Okay . . . Natural Selection is the explanation for evolution . . . It's the driving force behind evolution.
Natural selection -- this website is from Berkeley and has ALOT of info on natural selection and evolution. If you look at the 'table of contents' on the left, you should find practically anything you'll need.
And if you want an example of a modern species quote, "changing into another species," you're going to have a hard time. The thing is that evolution is gradual -- so gradual that it takes long periods of time for a population of a species to change enough to be classified as something else. It doesn't happen all of a sudden like it's one species one moment, then changes suddenly into something else. It's like a sculptor, whose job is never finished. In that sense, everything is evolving into something else, even humans!
But I suppose you're looking for something concrete, so I'll turn your attention to the platypus. It is an exceptional mammal that is shows many signs of evolution.
I don't think it "was all an accident." I think that it was driven by natural selection. (for your 'other option' option) Like Richard Dawkins said, "Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators." You look at it and think it's just an accident . . . but when you get close and start really studying it, it's all non-random.
Like I said to 'buckets,' I want proof for Creationism now, rather than arguments against evolution. Frankly, I'm getting tired of having to do your dirty work, cause I feel we're not really getting anywhere here.
natural selection?
survival of the fittest?
you know that?
one authoritative link please
and one link proving on species is evolving into another.
this natural selection should be visible today.
i should be able to look around and see missing links walking around.
the world around us should be a marvel of creatures in varying stages of evolution - where are they?
or, do i need to wait until The Next Million Years?
survival of the fittest?
you know that?
one authoritative link please
and one link proving on species is evolving into another.
this natural selection should be visible today.
i should be able to look around and see missing links walking around.
the world around us should be a marvel of creatures in varying stages of evolution - where are they?
or, do i need to wait until The Next Million Years?
Natural selection -- this website is from Berkeley and has ALOT of info on natural selection and evolution. If you look at the 'table of contents' on the left, you should find practically anything you'll need.
And if you want an example of a modern species quote, "changing into another species," you're going to have a hard time. The thing is that evolution is gradual -- so gradual that it takes long periods of time for a population of a species to change enough to be classified as something else. It doesn't happen all of a sudden like it's one species one moment, then changes suddenly into something else. It's like a sculptor, whose job is never finished. In that sense, everything is evolving into something else, even humans!
But I suppose you're looking for something concrete, so I'll turn your attention to the platypus. It is an exceptional mammal that is shows many signs of evolution.
I don't think it "was all an accident." I think that it was driven by natural selection. (for your 'other option' option) Like Richard Dawkins said, "Life results from the non-random survival of randomly varying replicators." You look at it and think it's just an accident . . . but when you get close and start really studying it, it's all non-random.
Like I said to 'buckets,' I want proof for Creationism now, rather than arguments against evolution. Frankly, I'm getting tired of having to do your dirty work, cause I feel we're not really getting anywhere here.
K
You want get proof, well proof that you will accept. But, where is evolutions proof? It requires faith and you have placed your faith in evolution which has no proof and wants to prove to you something that requires faith. My faith is in creation, yours is that we came from a monkey. Then consider, if we came from a monkey why is it wrong to cheat on your wife. They seem not care. Lionesses have fight their husbands to keep them from killing their babies.
Why do we wear clothes?
Why do we wear clothes?
N
I think we found our common ground.
Myself, I'd call it a damnable heresy. Remember, if you can't test it and repeat it, its not science.
Myself, I'd call it a damnable heresy. Remember, if you can't test it and repeat it, its not science.
But they cant. You can have the most advanced technologies offered by man, and you still; cant reproduce life from nothing. Nothing just evolves. Because you cannot see it in nature, and you can not even reproduce it even under controlled conditions . Why ? again its a lie.
You can add all the gasses you think are necessary to start life, along with the molecules and elements, the pressures and gasses. And you still will not see life just form or evolve from that.
I will take it farther; you can just throw in living cells, and still you will not see anything just evolve or materialize from that. Why? because its a lie. Life can not just happen from nothing without an designer to that.
Last edited: