Evolution vs. Intelligent Design

AudienceOfOne wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

Adonai wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Adonai wrote:i believe humanity was sneezed out of the nose of an enormous aardvark.

Wow you are an idiot. Its completely obvious that God created the heavens and the earth in 7 days with all flora and fauna present exactly as it is today. We are all inbred from Adam and Eve, even though incest is specifically forbade in the Bible, but its okay because the Bible can never be wrong because God wrote it himself! If you don't accept that you are an idiot! Every scientist ever has disproved this "evolution" and especially the Aardvarkian Creation Myth. You obviously need to go study your history and science

My bad. You are right. I have been studying unreliable sources. I need to get my nose out of the encyclopedias and science books and take up more concrete sources. Such as the bible.

encyclopedias and science books are concrete sources of information, for all the facts (disregard the theories presented as facts) do not conflict with the bible or the church!

Science and religon go hand in hand, sourworms/adonia... and you too pinthin. you can continue to play these silly games and your make believe world where all christians disregard science in whole...it is not true. We christians embrace science as the truth. to not do so would be irrational.

however, we do not support radical theories, such as evolution, which have no basis or proof. we only support the science which has been proven to undisputably be true.

you can't speak for every christian, but otherwise +1.

Trackaholic wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

SourWorms wrote:Yeah just take a look at my history book, the unedited and ucorrupted Byzantine Catholic Bible

if you did edit the byzantine catholic bible, it would no longer be the byzantine catholic bible now would it? it would be a rendition of the king james bible instead.

i don't get it. why is the byzantine bible so great?

the king james bible and bible such as the new american bible were taken up by heretics and edited to adapt to radical thinkings and heresy. In many cases, a single verse will have entirely different meanings given what bible it comes from.

example:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%203:5;&version=31;

you can see the verse changes drastically given what bible it comes from. sadly, the website does not include any byzantine or roman catholic versions.

Trackaholic wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:

Adonai wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Adonai wrote:i believe humanity was sneezed out of the nose of an enormous aardvark.

Wow you are an idiot. Its completely obvious that God created the heavens and the earth in 7 days with all flora and fauna present exactly as it is today. We are all inbred from Adam and Eve, even though incest is specifically forbade in the Bible, but its okay because the Bible can never be wrong because God wrote it himself! If you don't accept that you are an idiot! Every scientist ever has disproved this "evolution" and especially the Aardvarkian Creation Myth. You obviously need to go study your history and science

My bad. You are right. I have been studying unreliable sources. I need to get my nose out of the encyclopedias and science books and take up more concrete sources. Such as the bible.

encyclopedias and science books are concrete sources of information, for all the facts (disregard the theories presented as facts) do not conflict with the bible or the church!

Science and religon go hand in hand, sourworms/adonia... and you too pinthin. you can continue to play these silly games and your make believe world where all christians disregard science in whole...it is not true. We christians embrace science as the truth. to not do so would be irrational.

however, we do not support radical theories, such as evolution, which have no basis or proof. we only support the science which has been proven to undisputably be true.

you can't speak for every christian, but otherwise +1.

you are right, but I do not understand christians who dispute science. My reasoning is that god created science, and god would never create anything that disproves his existance, for what purpose would that serve him? so in the end, there is no science that disproves god.

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

Trackaholic wrote:No, for then it would no longe rbe the byzantine bible.

john 3:5 is a bad example, there are verses where they do not simply change the adjectives or pronouns and such, there are verse where the entire meanign is changed to adapt to whatever heresy they are pursuing.

you cannot change or reformat the bible, you cannot make thing s like "the youth bible" or the "new american bible" or "the new world bible"

it is far worse when someone tries to change the church teachings though, we have corrupt bishops, and even a corrupt pope.

man is just to weak to uphold the truth down the centuries.

FK wrote:I am curious as to why the current pope is corrupt though.

mae2937 wrote:all humans are corrupt because of sin no man is perfect or not corrupt

Adonai wrote:I am without sin because i do not believe such a place as hell can possibly exist. Therefore, the entire prospect of sin serves no purpose, except of course to brainwash the mindless wanderers of the earth to bow down an insignificant authority (the Pope)

Adonai wrote:

mae2937 wrote:all humans are corrupt because of sin no man is perfect or not corrupt

I am without sin.

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:No, for then it would no longe rbe the byzantine bible.

john 3:5 is a bad example, there are verses where they do not simply change the adjectives or pronouns and such, there are verse where the entire meanign is changed to adapt to whatever heresy they are pursuing.

you cannot change or reformat the bible, you cannot make thing s like "the youth bible" or the "new american bible" or "the new world bible"

it is far worse when someone tries to change the church teachings though, we have corrupt bishops, and even a corrupt pope.

man is just to weak to uphold the truth down the centuries.

you seem to be quite the conspiracy theorist. According to you, accepted science and the Bible do not go hand in hand and instead contradict eachother. You do not even believe in your own church, so I propose that you are no Catholic but rather your own traditionalist sect. If you do not agree with Catholic ideals, then you are not a Catholic

FK wrote:I do find it odd that every pope from one in the 1500s to John Paul II was born in Italy. =/

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

AudienceOfOne wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

no, they were still days, just not days like we know them to be now.

Adonai wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

no, they were still days, just not days like we know them to be now.

How do you suggest god defined a day? considering a day is defined by a planet rotating on its axis.

Adonai wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

no, they were still days, just not days like we know them to be now.

How do you suggest god defined a day? considering a day is defined by a planet rotating on its axis.

FK wrote:

Adonai wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

no, they were still days, just not days like we know them to be now.

How do you suggest god defined a day? considering a day is defined by a planet rotating on its axis.

God never defined a day, it was the person who wrote it.

Adonai wrote:

FK wrote:

Adonai wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

no, they were still days, just not days like we know them to be now.

How do you suggest god defined a day? considering a day is defined by a planet rotating on its axis.

God never defined a day, it was the person who wrote it.

So you therefore admit that some, and likely most, of the Bible's content was invented by its writer?

Adonai wrote:

FK wrote:

Adonai wrote:

AudienceOfOne wrote:

SourWorms wrote:

Trackaholic wrote:And yes sourworms, the 7 days of creation were symbolic, seeing as the 24 hour clock is a creation of man. And seeing as god controlled the sun, and thus the evening and dawn. one day could have represented 5 minutes or 5 years.

so you admit that the 7 day creation story was symbolic and not to be taken literally

no, they were still days, just not days like we know them to be now.

How do you suggest god defined a day? considering a day is defined by a planet rotating on its axis.

God never defined a day, it was the person who wrote it.

So you therefore admit that some, and likely most, of the Bible's content was invented by its writer?