Creationist child abusers close doors

morning-random-hg-25.jpg
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol.....you believe its necessary to believe that humans evolved and were not created or the concept of Christ as savior falls apart?........goodlord, you've achieved new heights of scripture manipulation.....
Click to expand...

Lil... That's not what I said. This is about your attempt to rewrite the flood story. Your bullshit is so thick you have confused yourself again or you are lying.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
oh, do you have some evidence they were transitional?.......
Click to expand...

Yes, obviously they are transitional fossils fitting perfectly between the traits and times.

Do you have any proof that they were created? No, you have nothing but a Bible you claim is filled with errors, misinformation, lacking continuity and omitting information you claim to know.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
worms then?.......bacteria at the very least.......what do you believe humans ultimately evolved from?......
Click to expand...

Ultimately, in this context could only mean last. So, homo sapiens. But since I must assume from experience that you are a barely literate moron, you must mean initially. That is in the descent of man thread, i.e., prokaryotes.
 
Professor Baxter said:
But that is not what he said. He said for all generations to come.
Click to expand...

Gensis 9:8-16

8*Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9*“I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you 10*and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth. 11*I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth.”

12*And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13*I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14*Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 15*I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. 16*Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.”
 
Professor Baxter said:
Yes, obviously they are transitional fossils fitting perfectly between the traits and times.

Do you have any proof that they were created? No, you have nothing but a Bible you claim is filled with errors, misinformation, lacking continuity and omitting information you claim to know.
Click to expand...

lol....so you don't need proof because its "obvious"......I love your scientific method.....
 
Professor Baxter said:
But that is not what he said. He said for all generations to come.
Click to expand...

yes.....8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9 “I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you 10 and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth.

so who are you claiming weren't included?.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol....so you don't need proof because its "obvious"......I love your scientific method.....
Click to expand...

It is nothing but one stawman after the next from you. That's not what I said. The proof is the fit between forms (i.e., the obvious similarities between both of the other forms and with the signs of gradual change in a specific and important trait) and the fit in the time frame. Did you happen to hit next and see the transition in the foot of the horses line containing several more steps.

What is your scientific method proving your alternative? You imagine it out of nothing. You steal from the Bible but ultimately reject it as a source.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yes.....8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9 “I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you 10 and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth.

so who are you claiming weren't included?.....
Click to expand...

I am not the one claiming the covenant was exclusive, you are. It clearly states that the covenant is intended for all of humanity and other life throughout the earth's existence.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
is it too difficult for you to comprehend tracing back ancestors until you get to the last one that could possibly be a possible ancestor?........



so slime instead of mold.....a step down it would seem.....
Click to expand...

"Last ancestor" would imply ones parents. In fact, another expression for the "most recent common ancestor" which was a point of discussion a while back is "last common ancestor" or "last universal ancestor." I am sorry you have such a severe dysfunction in expressing concepts dealing with order. You mean your first ancestor. But I knew what you meant and responded. Unlike you, I don't try to change the meaning of others statements.

From slime to you is a lateral move at best.
 
Professor Baxter said:
The proof is the fit between forms (i.e., the obvious similarities between both of the other forms and with the signs of gradual change in a specific and important trait) and the fit in the time frame. Did you happen to hit next and see the transition in the foot of the horses line containing several more steps.
Click to expand...
again the similarities do no prove transition....if you see similarties in three paintings done by a particular artist is it "obvious" that they are done by the same artist or it "obvious" that one is the ancestor of the other two?......


What is your scientific method proving your alternative? You imagine it out of nothing. You steal from the Bible but ultimately reject it as a source.
Click to expand...

I admit its a faith choice......if you would simply do the same we would have no argument....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top