Strengthen your faith in the bible Christians.

A dolphin having "remains of limbs" or hind limbs is not evidence for evolution, at all. This report came out through the associated press, which is very agenda biased and spun heavily in favor of your religion (Evolution). What this finding means for SURE is that the Dolphin has an extra set of fins. That's a clear fact. Being biased, they automatically jumped to an interpretation that these are back LEGS ! look at the pic:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Honestly, do those look like "legs" or fins ? All this assuming was published to us in a matter of fact manner before detailed research was done. The bones were not x-rayed, and bones were not even mentioned! One scientist said:

“I believe the fins may be remains from the time dolphins’ ancient ancestors lived on land … this is an unprecedented discovery.”

Without any real scientific research done, terms like I "believe" and "may be" were used and statements like "it is an UNPRECEDENTED discovery". Well I'm sure they do believe that, they been believing for years. They also used the error of the notion that the fossil record proves its evolutionary leap. Fossil fail to prove anything for evolution, we can talk about this if you want. So yes, it's a mutation but they insert and insist that this mutation 'reinserted' its self again...bur really the DNA of a dolphin already had the genetic information for a fin. This is not evolution. Does not support it at all. It is pounded into the evolutionary religion. This proves nothing. At the end of the day, this dolphin may mate and prodcue...a dolphin. Yup, hard isnt it ?


As for your human yolk sack: Vestigial arguments like these are based on already discredited theory of embryonic recapitulation, and are supported by proven forged diagrams of Darwinist Ernst Hackel.

The embryonic examples taught to you in text books are a proven lie. They were made up, and drawn to support evolution on purpose. Look it up. This example is utterly defunct, this does not even trouble atheist. Yes, this means the "GILL" slits too. We can get very detailed on this if you'd like, just ask.

You imply that just because I know evolution is wrong and that creation is true that I am dumb. Did I tell you that I was a staunch atheist for 28 years ? And that I studied fisheries and wildlife at Michigan State University for 3 1/2 years ? This argument that if you don't agree you don't understand is very weak. You see, a lot of real scientist disagree. The fact that almost all tax supported public universities require evolution be taught. There for, if you speak out against it you are either fired or told to teach it anyway. Arguments and evidence against evolution is ignored and shunned. Why ? Because you are being indoctrinated unto a belief system that is agenda biased and serves to mold you. I tell you the truth brother. Start thinking for yourself.

Again, the geological column does not exist anywhere in the world. It only exist in indoctrination text books, not reality. This column is VERY important to hold evolution together. It is so false. If it were true it would hold tried and tested, because it's true after all right?

Wrong, fossils are repeatedly found out of layer, many relating to humans. Artifacts are often found in layers of 'ages' not possible because they should of not existed yet. This is a huge problem and is ignored. Rock layers are undistributed.

I think William r. Corliss said it best when writing on scientific anomalies,

"Potentially more important to geological thinking are those unconformities that signal large chunks of geological history are missing, even though the strata on either side of the unconformity are perfectly parallel and show no evidence of erosion. Did millions of years fly by with no discernible effect? A possible though controversial inference is that our geological clocks and stratigraphic concepts need working on."



You suspect Hovind is a lair because he proves wrong what you think. Plain and simple. If you truly watched is videos then you are either blind or willingly ignorant. He is too smart to believe in what he teaches ? Ah, sure dude, good argument.

Trust me brother, I do my home work. I know evolution is a lie. I don't care that you believe it. It is just as religious as Christianity. But Christianity has the most evidence in favor.

I really suggest you look for Christ, ask him in your heart. God says that if you are really looking for truth he will reaveal it to you, I challenge you to have a open mind. After all, you claim you do. But do you ? I say this because I care about you man.


Peace.

 

Older Water Brother, before I get into a discussion of why I believe you are wrong can you please support your argument that days in the bible were 5000s long ? Either with Scripture or "gurus"

I need to know what to correct...

Being a bible believer as yourself, and that the bible is the infallible word of God, and according to your belief you are not even one years old yet. You are 7 seconds old.

Thanks brother.

 

And why should we take your literal interpretation?

By "no authentic credentials" I mean that, like Kent Hovind, they buy desgrees from diploma mills, or like some others have degrees in completely unrelated disiplines of science but claim to be experts, yet they still trump strawman ideas of evolutionary theory.

Which King James version? The first KJV had the texts which clearly give presedence to Prayer for the Dead.


Okay, this is my line of questioning:

All fossils, in a 6000 yr old Universe we laid down by the Flood, correct?

 

Like I said I've already explained this to you in another thread but this is how the reasoning goes, along with the salient Scriptures.

As you read Genesis chapter 1, from verse 3 onward, you will see that it is divided into six creative “days.” Some claim that these were literal 24-hour days, meaning that the entire universe and life on earth were created in less than a week! However, you can easily discover that the Bible does not teach that. The book of Genesis was written in Hebrew. In that language, “day” refers to a period of time. It can be either a lengthy one or a literal day of 24 hours. Even in Genesis all six “days” are spoken of collectively as one lengthy period—‘the day in which God made earth and heaven.’ (Genesis 2:4; compare 2 Peter 3:8.) The fact is, the Bible reveals that the creative “days,” or ages, encompass thousands of years.

A person can see this from what the Bible says about the seventh “day.” The record of each of the first six “days” ends saying, ‘and there came to be evening and morning, a first day,’ and so on. Yet, you will not find that comment after the record of the seventh “day.” And in the first century C.E., some 4,000 years downstream in history, the Bible referred to the seventh rest “day” as still continuing. (Hebrews 4:4-6) So the seventh “day” was a period spanning thousands of years, and we can logically conclude the same about the first six “days.”

Well, don't correct anything on my word alone, check the Bible to see for yourself if what I say agrees with God's word.

Yes if you wish to count my "days" in "creative days" then I may not even be that old.

Anytime.

 

OK thank you for getting back at me with some questioning. Why take my literal interpretation ? You should not take mine or anybodies, that is the point. Because it is Gods word, it's true and there is not one theory that stands scientific scrutiny that supports the Big Bang and evolution- not even one shred of evidence. God said he would preserve his word for all generations. He inspired it to be readable and easily understood. Why would God inspire the bible so only gurus and Pharisees could give a meaning to it ? That would be a cult. Give the bible (KJV the real bible) to 5,000 people who never heard any theories of evolution or the gospel. They will all come back and tell you the world was created in six literal days...why ? because it was so and that is what the bible states.

Some scripture to consider:

And the one who offered his offering on the first day was Nahshon the son of Amminadab, from the tribe of Judah. Numbers 7:12

The other tribes came in strict order:

On the second day Nethanel the son of Zuar, leader of Issachar, presented an offering. Numbers 7:18

On the third day Eliab the son of Helon, leader of the children of Zebulun, presented an offering. Numbers 7:24

On the fourth day Elizur the son of Shedeur, leader of the children of Reuben, presented an offering. Numbers 7:30

This list continues, until all twelve tribes had given their gifts. So the important question is this: Did the tribes take twelve literal days to present their gifts, or did they take twelve very long periods of time—perhaps twelve thousand years. Could Moses have been sitting there for twelve thousand years while the people brought their gifts? I suppose I’m basically a literalist; it seems most logical to suppose from the passage that these days were actually twelve literal, 24-hour days.


Besides this, there is not one shred of evidence that says the universe is billions of billions of years old. Bring some rhetoric or evidence to support otherwise please. This is were you are being crippled by the fallacy of the religion of evolution. It is shattering your faith in Gods word ? I hope not. Who is your God anyhow. He is not the God of the bible. Your belife in Old earth/evolution is very new and aligns with satanic NWO agenda in a nut shell.

Also, the Gap Theories (allowing for biblical interpretations of old earth) are only possible because of the new order bible translations. They are so sickening wrong. They are drawn form the Alexandrian texts. These texts have been compromised to allow for an old earth interpretation because evolution was gaining popularity. I can go more in detail. They are justified on the assumption that the KJV "revisions". If the KJV could be "revised" then so can new bibles be revised from faulty text. The truth is the KJV has never been revised. Expect for the New King James. In short, it's complicated and I can account more time on this in a later post.

You also speak of a version of the King James. There is only one since 400 years ago. The NEW KJ is not really a king James. Can I ask, what verse in scripture do you mean "Prayer for the dead" and what do you imply on that ? I'm not sure on your intent.

Kent Hovind earned his degree. I don't know why you think he bought his degree from a paper mill. He earned it just like any other PHD. Fact is, some public universities such as Eastern Michigan are carp schools compared to, say, the University of Michigan. But though people earn degrees from both. One is WAY better education, the other way less in quality and considered a "degree mill", but both are considered academic equals. Why ? Because they support the same theories of old earth. Wether they be a history Phd or biology. Get it ?

You must begin to question why they are teaching evolution and the humaist agenda behind it. It is not taught in the name of science, but in the name of agenda. I am not saying that the scholars are aware or not sincere. But the bigger picture must be understood, brother.

It don't matter. The degree mill argument is weak and only serves to discreet any facts against the religion of evolution in this matter. Kent is more that able and capable of thinking and reviewing evidence against other evidence. There is no problem or questions on his arguments. They are right. You don't need to be an expert to read God's word do you ? Well according to this argument you have to be, biased on what you believe on the age of the earth...catch my drift ?

Fact is, Kent never claimed to be an expert. You implied this to him. He is teaching the truth.


I would not say all fossils were laid by the flood in 4,000 years ago. However millions were laid because of the flood in however long it took the waters to receded and everything to hit dirt...I'm not sure your question or intent. The evidence supports a flood more than it does an old earth and most thories supporting it and evolution are created to make this all even possible. The fossils found in the rock layers of 'iniquity' and the oil created from them were deposited very quickly and formed quickly because of the flood.

'We will talk of this more once I get more clarification on your question here.

OH, it would be very helpful to know what bible you read. I read the KJV.

Your bro in Christ.

 

At old water brother. I am happy to see that you whole reasoning for believing an old earth swings by a thread on the Hebrew interpretation of the word "DAY" which, if I recall correctly, is "yom"

You still have to account that evolution is fallacy, big bang is fallacy.

... ....

So, I have A LOT to say on this and I think you are going to want to see it. So I am going to formulate a good post for you...Give me a season.


Oh, I will tell you now that you are wrong. Dangerously wrong...


Your bro in Christ.

 

No, that is only part of it, so you might want to reread the post before you answer.

I figured you did, so we'll see.

Since the Bible seems to disagree with you, I'll stick with what it says.

 

Fair enough, I am also going to read the other post that you made telling me why...

Oh, what bible version do you read ? That will help immensely.

 

Do you literally interpret John 6?

Why are there literally thousands of Protestant Denominations who disagree ofver interpretation? Is it maybe because the 16th Century idea of personal interpretation is an afront to God's Word?

Also if you use the KJV the "expanse" as it is translated in other editions is "firmament" in the KJV. If you gave it to people and asked them they'd tell you that there is a solid dome over the earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Clone

This at least shows that the Earth is at least 10000 years old---older than the geneologies in Scripture. OR God created with the "appearence of age" which would then mean that God created a misleading universe and cannot be trusted at all.

No, there is not one version. Look at its history.

In its first printings books such as Maccabees were found in it, but it was Parliment than banned the reading of these books in churches, and since 1666 began being printed without them (that is 30 years). The version was also standardized in 1769. Which do you use?

On an aside, how come it took God 1600 years to fix his Scripture?

http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/bartelt_dissertation_on_hovind_thesis.htm This is a review of his "dissertation". It is incomplete, horridly written, and not about what his title says it is about; yet he claims the title PhD.

I know this will not sway you, but basically Hovind is a fraud and from the way you argue it looks as though you have read way too many Chick Tracts

Would you at least concede that the vast majority of fossils have been laid down by the flood, or that the large fossil graveyeards were?

Think for a second about the sheer number of terrestrial fossils that have been found. Conservatively, 800 Billion at Karoo alone. This is only one place, and conservatively accounts for merely 1% of all vertebrates. Wouldn't that average out to roughly 2100 vertebrates per acre?


What you fail to see is that Creation and Evolution are not opposed: one tell what, the other tells how, the Bible tell why.

Genesis 1 tells about how the common things of worship at the time (sun, moon, stars, animals) were not created to be worshiped, but were subservient and to serve humans (the sun and moon and stars were created to help people divise seaosns and day and night). Theological points to be made, not scientific. Genesis 2 tell about our fallen nature, not history.

 

In the least hostile way possible.

Isn't the idea of Christianity to have more faith in Jesus, and not so much the bible? Shouldn't they strengthen their faith in Jesus rather than the bible?

 

Well, your faith will reveal to you that the bible is the infallible, inspired, true Word of our living God. God promises that those who search truth will be pulled unto it by him. Got never lies. So faith in the bible is very important and rewarding. There are some bibles out there that take away the deity of Christ as the Son of God, so depending on which one you read you might not know who Jesus really is.

The only way to your Father is through Christ, as he is in our Father.

You should have equal faith in both. They are of God. God is love.
More importanly, you should have complete trust in him and our King Jesus.

You must realize that you are a sinner deserving hell, and by having faith and trust in Christ, (that he is God's word in the flesh) you know he was sent down to wash away your sin by his sacrifice, and rose three days later into heaven. Then you will be saved. The bible is important to know what God wants and to learn what he taught man when he walked the earth as Jesus. He is the supreme example of how humans should act while on Earth. Praise the Lord !

Basic
Instructions
Before
Leaving
Earth

Have you ever heard the Gospel or the Good News Christian Future Optimistic Blues brother ?

 

I was born a Christian actually. So I guess that makes me one whether I like it or not.

I'm to understand that god never walked the earth as a living being, as he created all living beings on it, and if God is or was a real person...who created him? And if god IS love, then why is he perfectly okay with letting (what I believe to be) the majority of man kind go to hell. In the technical sense of the Bible, quite a few of us are sinners and at the same time, practice regular worship and study the gospels carefully.

The second paragraph brings to mind my true 'problem' with Christianity. HIS sacrifice wasn't really a sacrifice at all. He was captured because Judas betrayed him for 30 pieces of silver. Even IF Jesus died for the sins of me and my human brethren, why must I feel the responsibility to put my faith in his teachings? I respect them. They are honorable positions to take, to be sure. To be honest, I actually practice MOST of them, not because a book told me too, but because of the true kindness, compassion and common sense I feel naturally. Without gospel.

I curse, I drink, I have plenty of sex outside of marriage and both me and my current partner admit to having fantasies about assorted celebrities. These things don't make me a bad person though, as I'm hurting not another living soul.

Why should I fear damnation? Because I refuse to believe in something that had nothing to do with me in the first place? Or because none of us have a choice and we are in it whether we like it or not?

 

I have a lot of posting to do. I am going to answer this indepth...and no, as of right now, I'd say you are not a Christian by anymeans...

 

I haven't mastered sufficient sphincter control to speak out of my buttt, you added the word "literal", it does not appear in the bible. If you are looking to increase faith in the bible then that faith must not strain credulity.

 

You can use the KJV if you wish.

 

Where's the love man, where's the love?

 

I have not forgot about this thread...been busy. But I wrote this to share what I think about the dangers of evolution on a micro level .

Called: True Lies.
___________________

My Professors say people are just dumb destitute animals
Assembled in busted up Earth: atoms issuing mandibles
Life begun they say, "In the insane primordial soup
Bing-Bang stars. . . bust ocean-nut in chemical loops
Soup spontaneously generates in an act of creation
DNA formed somehow and Satan made indoctrination"

These scholars teach to do what feels good, ignore God
Animals don't have morals, might as well kill with bombs
I raised a hand, asked, is Great-Great Grandpa a banana ?
His face said yes. I didn't understand all this mantra,
"An Evolutionary tinker selects from random carbons
Like mercenaries of death hoeing weed from gardens"

Um, What ?

As an animal I would act, because I was one. A Lion
Of matter of fact, I obey only me, that's no lie son
I was blown away, only to be Periodic Elements
science applies all things with idiotic experiments

I love Evolution

I pulled a gun out of my back pack, clicky clack
I racked the slide back, shot instantly in attack
First round plugged the professors skull back
A Misty cloud of blood said I study the facts
I shot the teaching assistant too...execution
Wanting him to know I understand Evolution
Rest of the students simply cried, in denial ?
This is application and how to ace the Final
I was selecting against smart teachers
Lowering standards of tests in the future
Taking a student by the hair, we left together
Books dropped, calling all birds of one feather

In the campus yard he escaped my control
I rip shots to halt him, scrapping his skull
OH well, this is survival of the fittest, weak fool
Probably the sickest traits leaving the gene pool
I then noticed a motorcycle roll past us, near
I emptied a clip into his 'adaptive' riding gear
Denting his head in, I demonstrated selection
A loss, my gain. Mutation introduced, correction

On my new motorcycle

I sped down University avenue in quick suspension
With certainty I ride trusting my public education
I saw ten thousand animals on the sidewalks
Smart primates wearing ipods, buying small talk
I pop random shots and smile at the females
Figuring they like assholes who don't feel well

I thought

Wicked lies hurt, conversed in half truths.
Of thirsting eyes converting past phone booths
This consequential terror tallies up Continental divide
Do or die, death in error or suffer to confide ?
Lips of righteousness never, ever, ever uproot
Despite in consequences against this pursuit
It's all striking sulfur to insulate match sticks
Buffering what's in you, baits past magic tricks
Altars of hate author paying on deceptive deposits
Day light saving offers Slaves barter on dejected pockets

Later,

I arrive at my parents house like a baboon
To demonstrate my attention in the class room...
The tv was on, breaking news at Michigan State
Some killer was loose, displaying incredible hate
I told them that a selective force was natural
One bullet left, maybe Darwin was not factual...
Dad stopped, what the fuck are you doing Ed ?
Mom's eyes popped, I butt the barrel to my head
Click, pulled the trigger. My head exploded into a slimy mess
I just showed them. I was a great learner and scientist

I live Evolution.

The End.

 

You are not without.

 

What kind of "love"?

If it be the unconditional mercy of god then that is beyond what can be taught or aspired to but not beyond accepting.

If it be the unconditional love of a parent for their child, because they are their child, then that love is beyond what can be taught or aspired to but not beyond accepting.

If it be the unconditional desire to have life, endowed in all creation, then love is beyond what can be taught or aspired to, but not beyond accepting.

 

All good is love. God is good.