Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.Originally Posted by -EnVus-
If you believe man evolved from dust, why is there still dust?
Man didn't evolve from monkeys. No one believes that. Humans and primates are branches on the same tree of life.
Well that's good to hear that you are good that and you love and praise your mother and father. FYI evolution doesn't say man evolved from a monkey, science isn't a belief so it doesn't take faith, and I never said you live in a fairly take. I suppose I could say though that you believe in one.
Twisted Loop Racing
Yes he created man from dust/clay cause it is of the earth and when we are dead and done we can just return to the earth.
So to you it's more reasonable for you to explain our origins from this infinitely non observable being that gave life to us from dust and clay than that we evolved from a similar ancestor similar to apes?
Twisted Loop Racing
Yep if you think you are related to apes then good luck with that and don't fling feces my way.
Lol, there isn't "luck" either and it's not me that's flinging poop around.
Twisted Loop Racing
Lolol. So to you it's unimaginable that we came from an explosion or evolution from other creatures (that are proven to be here), yet it is completely within the realms of possibility that an entity that has never been proven to exist just said "Let it be" and it was?
FOR MORE INFO, CLICK THE PIC!!!
I believe in God.
But I don't believe we came from dust.
I'm guessing you mean evolution ? Big Bang theory...
Both more believable then the bible in my own opinion. They need to update the bible it's to fairy tale-ish. It's like them trying to make me believe in Santa clause all over again.
Sent from my mind
<3 Catnipples
Big Bang theory is a show on CBS and also a porn....its script needs a revision like your evolution theory.
What about evolution theory needs revision?
THE FAITH OF IDIOTS...
"I'm not a gynecologist... but I'll take a look."
Aaaaaah.... is this guy from a planet where they *gasp* MAKE SENSE?? He needs to stop this... he's scaring the resident bible-thumpers - LOL.
"I'm not a gynecologist... but I'll take a look."
If you're simply referring to just a theory Devon constructed then I'll take your side. However if you're disputing the Evolution theory altogether then may I ask you share what needs revision and your basis for those claim?
Twisted Loop Racing
God is a dillusion, if not a layer of comfort for the simple and or weak minded.
I'm gonna get the Nobel committee on the phone too. Surely if he has some evidence that evolution theory should be revised, and its peer reviewed, this could be huge
When we resort to insults we no longer have anything to debate. Also your statement couldn't be anymore false.
I suspect there is as small a chance that he will reply as the amount of factual rational evidence he would have to believe, support and provide if he were to. But hey I'll be honest and say I hope he does. I have a massive amount of curiosity.
Twisted Loop Racing
While it's true insults add little to nothing to a debate it's false logic to say there is nothing more to discuss.
Support your position of why his perspective is false on more than the fact that he made an insult. Otherwise your argument adds as little as his.
Twisted Loop Racing
I've only stated facts. Prove to me anything I have written is wrong. kthnxbye
I honestly think I have stated facts.
God/Gods/Religion Come and Go, Some last longer than others. It IS a Fad.
For people to continue to fill their "void" through FIXED false beliefs is primitive. Without an explanation the weak and simple minded lack logic and rational thinking skills.
Last edited by WhiteAccord; 05-24-2013 at 03:42 AM.
Maybe you did earlier in the thread but, I was referring to your most recent post. If you made points earlier I apologize for missing them.
You are absolutely correct that "God/Gods/Religions" do come and go. I wouldn't call it a fad I would say it came from an explanation for things that we as humans don't yet understand.
It is not necessarily just a void that needs to be filled but, that is true for some. I think why discussions and debates usually end up going south is because opposing sides resort to insults and attacks. Personally based on the evidence that I have found and that have been passively presented to me I do not believe. It is a fallacy though that all who do believe in a God(s) are weak, simple minded/ illogical, irrational individuals that lack intellect. There are MANY very bright, well-educated and successful people that do have faith and take the action to believe. Their reasons are many and it's just as unfair to group them all together prejudicially. Just as you wouldn't like if it were done to you in regards to this topic or anything other.
An idea to be considered by both sides is that what we know now and are so certain of will likely be looked on with amusement a couple hundred years from now.
I would say from my perspective and experience that those that adapt to new evidence and adopt the new information are more likely to be non-believers where as those that are religious largely due to the religion they’ve adopted generally react more slowly to new evidence and belief changes. A thought that supports my thinking is no matter how slowly the changes(on both sides) have happened it's well documented that religions have changed while even keeping the same nameplate. Would this be the result if their beliefs were absolute and structured by an absolute authority or would it be more likely that this is the result of something man made by an order of primates that are constantly trying to understand everything with brains developed and evolved to comprehend things on just a macro scale on the African plane.
Twisted Loop Racing
You've stated no facts at all.
A) The existence of God can neither be proven nor disproven. The belief either for or against will always be just that. There's no factual evidence supporting either side of the spectrum.
B) Your claim of anyone having faith in a dieity as being weak minded or simple minded is dead wrong as well. There are plenty of brilliant people through out history that have shared in having faith. Not to mention the innumerable amount of people with strong will to push past normal human limits because of their faith. The same can be said for atheist, agnostics, etc. etc.
Looks to me like the evolved monkey is resorting or poo flinging instead of engaging in a progressive dialogue.
Disclaimer: I believe in evolution as well.
Evolutionist claim large brain led to bipedalism, this isn't the case; austrolapithecus(quoted as the grandfather of modern man-->4 separated group which later mutated into modern man). Ask any evolutionist, bipedalism is the most distinct feature that separates the 4-5 major hominids. Among the four or five hominds, I can't remember from grade school, but one of them had a small brain and easily walked up right. Not periodically, but evidence showed it only walked up right-Full time, based on wear and tear on the bone. Mind you, bipedalism key advantages was to free hands from grasping tools,food,offsprings, and allowed the head to stay vigilant for predators. My point is that bipedalism far predates "the large brain theory" Evolutionist claim. enlighten me.
Why are you posting a youtube video, for others to talk on yourbehalf? When you can speak for yourself, hasn't evolutist tought you not to blinded follow, like the dillusionist worshippers. What does that make you?
-Listen this isn't an attack, but a open discussion of you're opinion, I'm not here to shove religion down your throat.
See my reply above, I'm trying to learn this evolution theory thing; why are these austrolepthecus not just an early form of apes? as dinosaurs are early forms of lizards and crocs? Mutation through out the millienia causes DNA to alter whose to say these are not just apes.
As far as I know, bipedalism in humans predated the large brain. Not sure where you learned the opposite. I've never heard anyone claim the opposite.
Please cite where Bipedalism is the most distinct feature that separates humans from the primate order and hominidae family prior to making that assertion. Even if you're referring to purely physical characteristics I don't think you can. Bipedalism's advantage exceeds that of simply grasping tools, food, holding/caring for offspring etc. it also gave the advantage of being able to see over the grass in the plains which we owe a lot to grass for our evolution and spread across the globe. Prior to grass being here and allowing for plains to exist our ancestors stayed in the trees for safety because it gave the best vantage point for food and predators.
You do understand that we didn't evolve directly from apes right? I don't understand the point you were making with the dinosaur comparison or what you were referring to in regards to the DNA mutations and apes. Please explain?
Twisted Loop Racing
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
