Do you believe in Darwins theory of evlution or do you believe in the bibcal cre

[shernajwine]

Sherene,  There has been another thread going on - I was trying to show evidence for God, from the very beginning, and that there was a cause for the Creation happening in the first place.  I really tried zeroing in on the ID, but as usual, I was disagreed with profusely.  But, I was trying to the best of my ability and from research to accurately show that there was ID with Creation and that ID'er was and is God.

Oh I don't doubt it jcribb. That argument will never cease. We won't be convinced otherwise and neither will opposition and that's okay. BUT, just as before, all we can do is put the info out there and pray that honest truth seekers will weigh the evidence from both sides and come to an honest conclusion.

[Falconer02]

There has been another thread going on - I was trying to show evidence for God, from the very beginning, and that there was a cause for the Creation happening in the first place.  I really tried zeroing in on the ID, but as usual, I was disagreed with profusely.  But, I was trying to the best of my ability and from research to accurately show that there was ID with Creation and that ID'er was and is God.

Recap-
All that you did was post a dozen watchmaker analogies with a few vague/technical examples that I doubt you really understood (considering myself and others posted the reality of the subject you would bring up). That's not zeroing in or accurate since you failed to realize and discuss the obvious faults with your 'the world is pretty much perfectly created for us!' argument. I gave you plenty of facts about the enormous faults, but you simply relied on your personal preference in the end rather than showing any evidence for ID.

all we can do is put the info out there and pray that honest truth seekers will weigh the evidence from both sides and come to an honest conclusion.

A good idea.

[jcribb16]

Sherene: Here's the thread.  I wasn't going to include it in this thread until Falconer came in here and responded.

 Re: I don't believe in the Devil or Hell (starts on p. 12)

[jcribb16]

Falconer, I don't want to bring the arguments from that thread in here, but I am going to say that contrary to what you say, I did show evidence for ID.  You don't want to agree, fine.  But, if you wish to continue with this, please go to the original thread and respond in there.  Thanks.

[shernajwine]

That thread is pretty lengthy and to be honest I read from page 12 to maybe 15 or 16. Those arguments, jcribb, are ones I myself have had with our friends Falconer and queen, among others. I see the same patterns and debate tactics from when I was posting a few months ago. I started getting a headache so I didn't read all the way to the end of the thread. Also my head is fuzzy from being sick.

I see where you were going and I appreciate all your effort in your research, good job 

But reading it was like I never left  :-

So basically, my advice is to make the presumption ahead of time that you will not convince anyone of what you are saying, all your sources will be regarded as psuedoscience and untrustworthy and if you copy and paste you will be called out..... but as long as you attempt to make yourself understood in an intelligent, mature, and comprehensible way then...that's all that matters. And quite frankly, there are several things said there from the opposing side that I have addressed as being incorrect, so apparently you must also assume that your opponent isn't really paying full attention either. So, with that in mind, if you still wish to debate those issues then it might not be as frustrating.

 

[Falconer02]

Falconer, I don't want to bring the arguments from that thread in here, but I am going to say that contrary to what you say, I did show evidence for ID.  

No. You didn't. Reread it. It goes from a decent argument, to you and Annella E-hugging, to fighting with queen, to me again as we argue prophecy-legitimacy, and then back to...ugh...faith healing  

So basically, my advice is to make the presumption ahead of time that you will not convince anyone of what you are saying, all your sources will be regarded as psuedoscience and untrustworthy and if you copy and paste you will be called out..... but as long as you attempt to make yourself understood in an intelligent, mature, and comprehensible way then...that's all that matters. And quite frankly, there are several things said there from the opposing side that I have addressed as being incorrect, so apparently you must also assume that your opponent isn't really paying full attention either. So, with that in mind, if you still wish to debate those issues then it might not be as frustrating.

You can't trust sources that say or assume the wrong things from the get-go (example being Jc posting a link that led to a creationist-science site that said evolution means we came from monkeys.). And, for the sake of internet debates, all religious/political/sexual-preference threads I've ever seen usually look like the ones here on FC. It's just this forum is usually full of women, so it's different. I'm used to a mixed crowd, so this is a bit unique.

Also my head is fuzzy from being sick.

You too? Yeah, same here. Buhhhhh....
Feel better!

[jddins]

i believe what most of you are referring to as evolution is actually adaptation, and obviously that happens.  but evolution in the full sense of the word denies any and all intelligent involvement by a creator, so yes, evolution and creation are definitely mutually exclusive.  as for me, i definitely believe in an intelligent creator--God.  and evolution has not been proven.  again adaptation, yes, but not evolution as the origin or all species.  there are vast gaps in the fossil record.  and did ya know that Darwin himself questioned his theory before he died.

[Falconer02]

and evolution has not been proven.

Yes. It has. Do your hw, friend.

and did ya know that Darwin himself questioned his theory before he died.

All scientists question well-known theories every day. It's how we discover and test new things. If a scientist still questions their theory on their deathbed, that is a noble thing.

[jcribb16]

Quote from jcribb:
Falconer, I don't want to bring the arguments from that thread in here, but I am going to say that contrary to what you say, I did show evidence for ID.  

Quote from Falconer:
No. You didn't. Reread it. It goes from a decent argument, to you and Annella E-hugging, to fighting with queen, to me again as we argue prophecy-legitimacy, and then back to...ugh...faith healing      

Yes. I did.  "sigh"    You need to reread it yourself.     "sigh"

Sherene:  Thanks for the advice reminder:  I just can't seem to help myself.         But I'm working on it.  

[Falconer02]

You showed off things that had completely natural explanations to them. Unless I'm mistaken and I skipped your evidence of ID w/o the watchmaker analogies you kept presenting.

[shernajwine]

You can't trust sources that say or assume the wrong things from the get-go (example being Jc posting a link that led to a creationist-science site that said evolution means we came from monkeys.). And, for the sake of internet debates, all religious/political/sexual-preference threads I've ever seen usually look like the ones here on FC. It's just this forum is usually full of women, so it's different. I'm used to a mixed crowd, so this is a bit unique.

What you consider a wrong assumption is going to be on every (pro ID or creationism sight) and that is the assumption obviously that there is an intelligence behind the design and though ID cannot say by 100% falsifiability that it is the christian God, they both have that conclusion. No matter what legitimate science they bring to the table.....you and others disregard it because of their God agenda. Therefore NO site presented from an ID or creationist POV is going to be accepted by you. That's fine it just means as I told jcribb, that if she already assumes ahead of time that her sources will not be considered as legit then she may not get as frustrated when they are called out as pseudoscience.

And thanks, I'm doped up on nyquil so hopefully I made sense just now. 

[jcribb16]

Thank you, Sherene.  Nicely said!  Hoping you are feeling better today.

[healthfreedom]

I believe the biblical account of creation. Darwinism is only a "man-made" thery; no real facts or scientific evident. The bible declares that "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

[Falconer02]

No matter what legitimate science they bring to the table.....you and others disregard it because of their God agenda.

There within lies the problem- foundation of reasoning.

I believe the biblical account of creation. Darwinism is only a "man-made" thery; no real facts or scientific evident. The bible declares that "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

I'm not even going to bother responding to this since you seem to be a few bricks shy of a load pertaining to everything I've seen you post here this morning. C'mon now! Open a book!

[Mikena]

  Everyone has an opinion about this particuliar topic. I must say that I am on-board with the belief that God is the Creator of this vast and beautiful world that we live on. I get alot of comfort in my daily walk through life believing that there is a far greater power. I would rather believe NOW and find out later that I am wrong; rather than NOT believe now and find a more harsh reality waiting for me later. It is just an idea that I would like to share with you. Alot of people have a hard time believing in something that cannot be seem to the naked eye but Faith is alot like Love it is felt in your heart.