Darwin's False Religion

[fossten]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Darwin's False Religion
Pat Boone

Monday, Feb. 5, 2007

There it was, glinting in the sand, something catching the searing sub-Saharan sun.

The half conscious, desperately thirsty British airman first thought he was hallucinating. As he staggered toward the shiny object, he prayed it was something liquid, something that would cool his parched throat. But it wasn't; as he grasped it in his hand and shook the sand away, he realized he was holding a watch.

A watch! And not just any watch. Soon after, when he'd been rescued and returned to England, he showed it to his superior officers, and then to scientific experts. At first, no one could identify the maker or even how old the timepiece was. Nothing quite like it had ever been seen. It was fashioned of finest 24 karat gold, the design magnificent, the face a gloriously transparent crystal, the wristband intricate and obviously very expensive. And the most amazing feature: the sweep second hand was moving gracefully in one fluid motion around the Roman numerals — keeping absolutely perfect time — and it seemed to need no winding or even motion to keep it running!

Eventually, Darwinian scientists concluded that this exquisite artifact had not been manufactured.

It had evolved.

It started out as a primitive sundial from prehistoric times, then it was swept and carried along and burnished by howling winds and abrasive sands, colliding over the millennia with other whirling objects and substances, melting and freezing and morphing finally into this magnificent timepiece, purely by happenstance. And, because of its primary ingredients and millennial buffeting by the elements, it now was so in tune with the universe that it kept atomic clock-type time!

Anybody gullible enough to believe that sappy saga?

No?

Well, how about one even more farfetched and absurd? In this vast universe, operating in such dependable precision, we can confidently send human beings a quarter million miles into space, all the way to the surface of the moon and back, safely.

Our earth, moving in quiet orbit around the sun, so perfectly placed that life of all kinds flourish, while just a little distance closer or farther away, and the globe would not support life at all. And the human body, to say nothing of the mysterious brain, is made of such a myriad collection of mechanisms and infinitesimal organisms, all functioning in unexplainable synchronicity, that all the scientists who've ever lived have yet to understand more than a fraction of its workings. And all of this just "happened."

No blueprint, no design, no intelligence, no creator or creation process. Just blind chance, and something called "evolution."

As absurd, as nonsensical as this concept is, it's being swallowed whole and taught to our kids by college-educated, highly intelligent professors, encouraged by the National Education Association, and militantly defended by the ACLU. Not one of these Ph.D.s can explain what started it all, where the mass and energy (the basic ingredients of which all things consist) began or came from.

They posit a "primordial ooze," little one-celled organisms, some cataclysmic "big bang" explosion from which our unfathomable universe was created, and buy into a fantastic theory in which millions of life forms "evolved" into what we now see all around us, and apparently on only this one relatively small rock in all of space. Nowhere else.

Not one Ph.D. I've ever heard — totally aware of one of the basic laws of science, "every action creates an equal and opposite reaction" — can hope to explain what the "action" was that created the "equal and opposite reaction" we call matter.

In his wonderful book, "Darwin's Black Box," author Michael Behe details the current "biochemical challenge to evolution."

As true science has developed, and modern technology is ever more able to peer deeply into the whirling universe of subatomic particles, the concept that life marched forward, mutation by mutation, from "simple" cell to complex organism, has been knocked into the proverbial cocked hat. There is no "simple" cell, and never has been.

Behe describes, even depicts, the "irreducible complexity" of the most microscopic living cell, which is in itself enormously complex and populated by intricate sub-systems — all necessary for cell function.

The more powerful and probing our microscopes become, the more diverse and dizzyingly complicated the simplest building blocks become; each is a tiny pulsing universe in itself!

Consider this: In 1925, in the infamous Scopes "monkey trial," ACLU attorney Clarence Darrow took the position that it was bigotry to teach just one view of human origins!

He was defending the right of the science teacher to offer the theory of evolution as an alternative to the long accepted account of creation. And now, that same ACLU is instituting lawsuits all over America wherever anybody dares to offer intelligent design, or any other alternative to the theory of evolution!

What blatant hypocrisy!

Here's one more pertinent consideration, never reported by the most devoted Darwinian: Charles Darwin's own statements, especially as he approached his own demise.

Earlier in his life, he openly acknowledged "the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe . . . as the result of blind chance or necessity."

His subsequent disciples evidently dismiss that thought. Doesn't fit the "theory." But in a fascinating book, John Myers' "Voices from the Edge of Eternity," we find the detailed personal account of Lady Hope, of Northfield, England, who visited the aging scientist often at his bedside during his last days.

It's too long to recount well here, but she tells of the Bible he was reading constantly, and of the worship services that took place regularly in the summerhouse in his garden. She says that when she brought up the controversy still raging between believers in the Genesis account of creation and the growing group of scientists and teachers dismissing that account in favor of his "The Origin of Species" and related theories, he seemed distressed. And "a look of agony came over his face as he said, ‘I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time about everything. To my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them.'"

Exactly.

Charles Darwin may have birthed flawed theories, but in this case he proved prophetic.

Now, Dr. Jonathan Wells states flatly, "I think in 50 years, Darwinian evolution will be gone from the science curriculum. People will look back on it and ask how anyone could, in their right mind, have believed this, because it's so implausible when you look at the evidence." But 50 years could be enough to destroy the faith of two generations of our young, enough to replace it with a bankrupt false religion. Will we have the courage, the gumption, to make sure that doesn't happen?

 

[TheDude]

"It started out as a primitive sundial from prehistoric times, then it was swept and carried along and burnished by howling winds and abrasive sands, colliding over the millennia with other whirling objects and substances, melting and freezing and morphing finally into this magnificent timepiece, purely by happenstance. And, because of its primary ingredients and millennial buffeting by the elements, it now was so in tune with the universe that it kept atomic clock-type time!"

That is the stupist evolution down-play analogy I have yet to hear... Evolution does not (repeat, does not) dictate that a specific animal turned into something else just because time elapsed.

"No blueprint, no design, no intelligence, no creator or creation process. Just blind chance, and something called "evolution."

"Evolution" does not state that thier isn't a God... It's a false accusation that Creationist like to label Evolution Scientist with simply because "Evolution Theory" does not perfectly flow with what the Bible says. Evolution and Athiesm do not go hand and hand exclusively.

 

[fossten]

"It started out as a primitive sundial from prehistoric times, then it was swept and carried along and burnished by howling winds and abrasive sands, colliding over the millennia with other whirling objects and substances, melting and freezing and morphing finally into this magnificent timepiece, purely by happenstance. And, because of its primary ingredients and millennial buffeting by the elements, it now was so in tune with the universe that it kept atomic clock-type time!"

That is the stupist evolution down-play analogy I have yet to hear... Evolution does not (repeat, does not) dictate that a specific animal turned into something else just because time elapsed.

Yes it does. Evolution specifically calls for the unexplained change from one species to another. That is the ONLY WAY we could have descended from apes. You know better than that.

"No blueprint, no design, no intelligence, no creator or creation process. Just blind chance, and something called "evolution."

"Evolution" does not state that thier isn't a God... It's a false accusation that Creationist like to label Evolution Scientist with simply because "Evolution Theory" does not perfectly flow with what the Bible says. Evolution and Athiesm do not go hand and hand exclusively.

Well, that depends on WHICH THEORY of evolution you're referring to. There are three, or didn't you know that? Want me to help you out here?
1. Evolution (chance)
2. Neo-Darwinian evolution (survival of the fittest)
3. Theistic evolution (God used evolution)

Only the third theory allows for God to exist. However, each of the three theories explicitly disagrees with the other two. So which one do you believe?

And while we're at it, do me a favor, explain where the solid matter for the big bang came from, if there isn't a God. If you can't do that, then you must acknowledge logically that the third theory is the one you espouse. Anything else is simply brute stubbornness.

 

[TheDude]

Yes it does. Evolution specifically calls for the unexplained change from one species to another. That is the ONLY WAY we could have descended from apes. You know better than that.


Well, that depends on WHICH THEORY of evolution you're referring to. There are three, or didn't you know that? Want me to help you out here?
1. Evolution (chance)
2. Neo-Darwinian evolution (survival of the fittest)
3. Theistic evolution (God used evolution)

Only the third theory allows for God to exist. However, each of the three theories explicitly disagrees with the other two. So which one do you believe?

And while we're at it, do me a favor, explain where the solid matter for the big bang came from, if there isn't a God. If you can't do that, then you must acknowledge logically that the third theory is the one you espouse. Anything else is simply brute stubbornness.

Unexplained chance? You mean "random mutation"? Also, man didn't turn into man from an ape; modern man and modern apes share a (very) distant relative(s), that's Evolution, not a chimpanzee turned unexplainably into a man.

I think all three have valid points and it would be foolish to completely dismiss any single one of them entirely.

1) Random chance is random mutation(?), mutations happen and these would be micro (beneficial) changes over very long periods of time, no one accepts macroevolution anymore. i.e. a fish grew legs and went on land, that's archaic thinking.
2) Darwin(ism) was a pioneer in the field of evolution and a field that is constantly changing as new knowledge and new technology allow for greater insight. But his "survival of the fittest" does play a part in the bigger picture. The world changes, you either adapt to it or you die.
3) Very possible as "Evolution" is extremely complex and a beginning had to start from something.

I don't now how "it" all started, that is a question of such a complex nature I wouldn't assume to say, "I know for certain"; it's very possible that is where God comes in though.

Don't try and railroad me into a train of thought, just becuase I can safely say "I do not know" isn't brute stubborness; "brute stubborness" is stating 'If you can't fully tell me how what "A" is then "B" is the ONLY answer!' when we all know C through Z and beyond are possible.

 

[fossten]

The problem with the arguments of proponents of evolution is that all their arguments start with "Assume xxx..." For example, assume a big bang, assume a spark of life, assume an amoeba, assume an explosion, ad nauseum.

That's not scientific. If you have to assume something, you haven't explained where something came from. Therefore, the argument is invalid and unscientific.

 

[shagdrum]

Adaptation and Evolution (in the Darwin sense) are two different things.

 

[DLS8K]

The problem with the arguments of proponents of evolution is that all their arguments start with "Assume xxx..." For example, assume a big bang, assume a spark of life, assume an amoeba, assume an explosion, ad nauseum.

That's not scientific. If you have to assume something, you haven't explained where something came from. Therefore, the argument is invalid and unscientific.

I'll rephrase that for you: The problem with the arguments made by proponents of an All Mighty Creator (i.e GOD) is that all their arguments start with "Assume xxx." For example, assume that there is one person responsible for the creation of the universe and that he created Adam and out of Adam created Eve. From there began our life.

That isn't scientific either.......if you have to assume something, than YOU haven't explained where something came from. Therefore, YOUR argument is no more invalid the opposing argument.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Let's not even mention the "credibility factor" of evolutionists vs. creationists.

Evolutionists believe the earth is over 500,000,000 years old, +/- 10 million years (+/- 2%).

Creationists believe the earth is 40,000 years old, +/- 60,000 years (+/- 150%). :bowrofl:

 

[DLS8K]

Let's not even mention the "credibility factor" of evolutionists vs. creationists.

Evolutionists believe the earth is over 500,000,000 years old, +/- 10 million years (+/- 2%).

Creationists believe the earth is 40,000 years old, +/- 60,000 years (+/- 150%). :bowrofl:

I'm sure Fossten will find some article from Newsmax stating that the Earth is indeed 40000 years old. He will also find something to do with dinosaurs not existing because they are not mentioned in the Bible.

 

[MAC1]

I heard about a theory that states that prior to man there were ape-like beings living on Earth, which is based on the biblical account of Genesis. Though I am a Bible believing Christian it seems that God could have created human-like beings prior to the creation of humans. And if there is indeed anything close to evolution it may indeed have to do with God creating beings prior to man and then eventually created humans.

Fossten have you heard about this theory?

 

[MAC1]

Creationists believe the earth is 40,000 years old, +/- 60,000 years (+/- 150%).

Of all the theories concerning Earth's age I have never heard this one. Where's the link?

I also found some info about Neanderthal being genetically different than humans but both apparently coexisted in Europe.

Evidence for a genetic discontinuity between Neandertals and 24,000-year-old anatomically modern Europeans

Edited by Henry C. Harpending, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, and approved March 27, 2003 (received for review January 20, 2003)

During the late Pleistocene, early anatomically modern humans coexisted in Europe with the anatomically archaic Neandertals for some thousand years. Under the recent variants of the multiregional model of human evolution, modern and archaic forms were different but related populations within a single evolving species, and both have contributed to the gene pool of current humans. Conversely, the Out-of-Africa model considers the transition between Neandertals and anatomically modern humans as the result of a demographic replacement, and hence it predicts a genetic discontinuity between them. Following the most stringent current standards for validation of ancient DNA sequences, we typed the mtDNA hypervariable region I of two anatomically modern Homo sapiens sapiens individuals of the Cro-Magnon type dated at about 23 and 25 thousand years ago. Here we show that the mtDNAs of these individuals fall well within the range of variation of today's humans, but differ sharply from the available sequences of the chronologically closer Neandertals. This discontinuity is difficult to reconcile with the hypothesis that both Neandertals and early anatomically modern humans contributed to the current European gene pool.

 

[fossten]

I'll rephrase that for you: The problem with the arguments made by proponents of an All Mighty Creator (i.e GOD) is that all their arguments start with "Assume xxx." For example, assume that there is one person responsible for the creation of the universe and that he created Adam and out of Adam created Eve. From there began our life.

That isn't scientific either.......if you have to assume something, than YOU haven't explained where something came from. Therefore, YOUR argument is no more invalid the opposing argument.

First of all, there is a mountain of scientific evidence that supports creation; the evolutionary community is so afraid their bubble will be burst that they try to prevent its debate. Look who's afraid to debate and allow the discussion in schools. It's the evolutionists. They know they will lose the discussion and they don't want it to happen.

Secondly, the Bible DOES mention dinosaurs. Guess you've never read it, so we can cross your name off the informed list.

Oh, and Johnny, I don't know why a 40,000 year old planet is funny to you, but your attempt to poke fun falls flat, especially since you are using false numbers in a vain straw man attempt to show a difference in percentages. It's sophomoric, but why should I be surprised. The fact is that it is easier scientifically to show that the earth is less than 60,000 years old than it is to prove that the earth is billions of years old. And THAT is a FACT.

 

[TheDude]

Wouldn't Biblical accounts place the Earth's age somewhere around a (mere) 6 thousands years?

 

[TheDude]

I also found some info about Neanderthal being genetically different than humans but both apparently coexisted in Europe.

It's been a long while since I read up on human evolution/migration... But if I recall directly, the train of thought is leaning towards many migrations out of Africa at different (expansive) periods of time. Though Neanderthals are indeed human, they are different (earlier)humans from a different branch of the human evolutionary tree; think of them as a far distant cousin to Cro-Magnon/modern man. The Neanderthal physique isn't inferior to modern humans, it differs becasue it was suited(adapted) to survive extreme cold and harsh environments i.e. an Ice Age(s). Broad barrel chest, short thick arms and legs to keep heat in the body where it's needed near the vitals, large nasal passages for extended periods of exertion(hunting) etc. etc.

I watched a show years ago where they brought in forensic scientist, the ones that rebuild murder victims remains from clay using the bones/remains as a base. They rebuilt a Neanderthal out of remains and concluded that though a Neanderthal male stood around 5'3" inches tall, they were about 3 times as physically strong an average (modern) man. Lesson here, don't mess with a Neanderthal in a dark alley

 

[fossten]

It's been a long while since I read up on human evolution/migration... But if I recall directly, the train of thought is leaning towards many migrations out of Africa at different (expansive) periods of time. Though Neanderthals are indeed human, they are different (earlier)humans from a different branch of the human evolutionary tree; think of them as a far distant cousin to Cro-Magnon/modern man. The Neanderthal physique isn't inferior to modern humans, it differs becasue it was suited(adapted) to survive extreme cold and harsh environments i.e. an Ice Age(s). Broad barrel chest, short thick arms and legs to keep heat in the body where it's needed near the vitals, large nasal passages for extended periods of exertion(hunting) etc. etc.

I watched a show years ago where they brought in forensic scientist, the ones that rebuild murder victims remains from clay using the bones/remains as a base. They rebuilt a Neanderthal out of remains and concluded that though a Neanderthal male stood around 5'3" inches tall, they were about 3 times as physically strong an average (modern) man. Lesson here, don't mess with a Neanderthal in a dark alley

Neandert[h]als were actually fully human. The DNA tests used to try to show a distinction were flawed, skewing the data in an attempt to satisfy a preconceived position.

Christopher Stringer is the big proponent of the "out of Africa" model, which by the way was his attempt to avoid the latent racism in evolution. His mistakes are covered in this book.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Of all the theories concerning Earth's age I have never heard this one. Where's the link?

It's around here on LvC somewhere I'm sure, do a search. All I remember is that fossten was arguing that since creationist's estimates of the earth's age was only +/-60,000 years that it was more credible than the evolutionist's estimate of +/- 10,000,000 years and therefore "proved" evolution wrong. I might have gotten the numbers off a little, but I do remember that according to fossten's numbers that it was possible that the earth didn't even exist yet.
:bowrofl:

Any one ever see the movie/documentary "What the BLEEP Do We Know? Down the Rabbit Hole" ?? Pretty interesting take on quantum physics and how to explain the disparity between "the church" and "scientists".

 

[fossten]

It's around here on LvC somewhere I'm sure, do a search. All I remember is that fossten was arguing that since creationist's estimates of the earth's age was only +/-60,000 years that it was more credible than the evolutionist's estimate of +/- 10,000,000 years and therefore "proved" evolution wrong. I might have gotten the numbers off a little, but I do remember that according to fossten's numbers that it was possible that the earth didn't even exist yet.
:bowrofl:

Any one ever see the movie/documentary "What the BLEEP Do We Know? Down the Rabbit Hole" ?? Pretty interesting take on quantum physics and how to explain the disparity between "the church" and "scientists".

(slightly off topic warning - ref another thread)

Well you just contradicted yourself yet again, bringing up quantum physics, which by the way you know nothing about. Fact is that quantum physics was rejected early on by scientists, and yet is now accepted. Much like the flat earth theory, and the Geocentric theory. Yet you are a big Global Warming fearmonger. That will go by the wayside as well.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

How? Kinda like how you are now contradicting yourself??

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showpost.php?p=132084&postcount=1

*owned*

Give it up Percy, er, I mean David. You flip-flop on your position more frequently than Ted Haggard changes sexual orientation. :bowrofl:

 

[fossten]

How? Kinda like how you are now contradicting yourself??

http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com/showpost.php?p=132084&postcount=1

*owned*

Give it up Percy, er, I mean David. You flip-flop on your position more frequently than Ted Haggard changes sexual orientation. :bowrofl:

I haven't contradicted myself, Ahmadinejohnnie. Nice try, Mr. Fearhatemonger.

Can you guess which one is Ahmadinejohnnie?

 

[DLS8K]

First of all, there is a mountain of scientific evidence that supports creation; the evolutionary community is so afraid their bubble will be burst that they try to prevent its debate. Look who's afraid to debate and allow the discussion in schools. It's the evolutionists. They know they will lose the discussion and they don't want it to happen.

Secondly, the Bible DOES mention dinosaurs. Guess you've never read it, so we can cross your name off the informed list.

Oh, and Johnny, I don't know why a 40,000 year old planet is funny to you, but your attempt to poke fun falls flat, especially since you are using false numbers in a vain straw man attempt to show a difference in percentages. It's sophomoric, but why should I be surprised. The fact is that it is easier scientifically to show that the earth is less than 60,000 years old than it is to prove that the earth is billions of years old. And THAT is a FACT.

I'm going to need an exact quote from the Bible that mentions dinosaurs. Secondly, do you believe man was created in the sense that God created Adam and Eve? If that is the case, I am going to need scientific evidence that indeed happened. If you can't give me evidence other than the Bible says so, than I can't believe you because you lack any proof.
The creation of the Earth in the Biblical sense is not founded. At least the scientific community has offered many different hypotheses on how the Earth/Universe was created. You believe what the bible says to be fact. Nowhere in the scientific community is any one way of the creation said to be as fact.
Also, the Earth has been around longer than the Bible, has it not? The creation in the biblical sense is just another theory. You can believe in the Bible and live your life according to its' teachings.....spouting religious intolerance to any other religion that isn't Christian. That is your choice......and at the same time you can be a biggot and a discriminator.

 

[TheDude]

Technically it does...

Genesis 1:24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds...

There's also a passage somewhere that mentions a large animal with a long neck and a tree trunk like tail, but that's inconclusive at best.

Personally, if humans, dinosaurs and every single (yeah, that many) type of living creature now extinct lived along side each other, I'd think the Bible would have more extensive mentions of such (magnificent) beast... If you lived next door to a Tyrannosaurus Rex and a Wooly Mammoth, wouldn't you write about it?

 

[DLS8K]

Technically it does...

Genesis 1:24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds...

There's also a passage somewhere that mentions a large animal with a long neck and a tree trunk like tail, but that's inconclusive at best.

Personally, if humans, dinosaurs and every single (yeah, that many) type of living creature now extinct lived along side each other, I'd think the Bible would have more extensive mentions of such (magnificent) beast... If you lived next door to a Tyrannosaurus Rex and a Wooly Mammoth, wouldn't you write about it?

I read that as well and I agree with your statement.

 

[fossten]

I'm going to need an exact quote from the Bible that mentions dinosaurs. Secondly, do you believe man was created in the sense that God created Adam and Eve? If that is the case, I am going to need scientific evidence that indeed happened. If you can't give me evidence other than the Bible says so, than I can't believe you because you lack any proof.
The creation of the Earth in the Biblical sense is not founded. At least the scientific community has offered many different hypotheses on how the Earth/Universe was created. You believe what the bible says to be fact. Nowhere in the scientific community is any one way of the creation said to be as fact.
Also, the Earth has been around longer than the Bible, has it not? The creation in the biblical sense is just another theory. You can believe in the Bible and live your life according to its' teachings.....spouting religious intolerance to any other religion that isn't Christian. That is your choice......and at the same time you can be a biggot and a discriminator.

Again, was that YOU that said that, or was that a rock or random collection of molecules? If we're all just a bunch of mass, then why does it matter so much to you?

Job Chapter 41: (By the way, Job is unanimously agreed upon to be the oldest book in the Bible)

1 Canst thou draw out leviathan with a hook?
or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?
2 Canst thou put a hook into his nose?
or bore his jaw through with a thorn?
3 Will he make many supplications unto thee?
Will he speak soft words unto thee?
4 Will he make a covenant with thee?
Wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
5 Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?
Or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?
6 Shall the companions make a banquet of him?
Shall they part him among the merchants?
7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons?
or his head with fish spears?
8 Lay thine hand upon him,
remember the battle, do no more.
9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain:
shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?
10 None is so fierce that dare stir him up:
who then is able to stand before me?
11 Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him?
Whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.
12 I will not conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion.
13 Who can discover the face of his garment?
Or who can come to him with his double bridle?
14 Who can open the doors of his face?
His teeth are terrible round about.
15 His scales are his pride,
shut up together as with a close seal.
16 One is so near to another,
that no air can come between them.
17 They are joined one to another,
they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.
18 By his sneezings a light doth shine,
and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps,
and sparks of fire leap out.
20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke,
as out of a seething pot or caldron.
21 His breath kindleth coals,
and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
22 In his neck remaineth strength,
and sorrow is turned into joy before him.
23 The flakes of his flesh are joined together:
they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.
24 His heart is as firm as a stone;
yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
25 When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid:
by reason of breakings they purify themselves.
26 The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold:
the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.
27 He esteemeth iron as straw,
and brass as rotten wood.
28 The arrow cannot make him flee:
sling stones are turned with him into stubble.
29 Darts are counted as stubble:
he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
30 Sharp stones are under him:
he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.
31 He maketh the deep to boil like a pot:
he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
32 He maketh a path to shine after him;
one would think the deep to be hoary.
33 Upon earth there is not his like,
who is made without fear.
34 He beholdeth all high things:
he is a king over all the children of pride.


Isaiah 27:1

1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

Psalm 74:13-14

13 Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters.
14 Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

Psalm 104:26

26 There go the ships:
there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein.

Job 40:15-24

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee;
he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins,
and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar:
the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass;
his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God:
he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food,
where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees,
in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow;
the willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not:
he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes:
his nose pierceth through snares.

Psalm 53

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.
2 God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God.
3 Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy;
there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
4 Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread: they have not called upon God.
5 There were they in great fear, where no fear was: for God hath scattered the bones of him that encampeth against thee: thou hast put them to shame, because God hath despised them.
6 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! When God bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.


It's funny how you refuse to believe anything unless you see it for yourself. Do you believe in George Washington? Do you believe in Ben Franklin? You never saw these men, yet you accept by faith without questioning that they existed, simply based on the writings and drawings of other human beings. You accept every building you see around you, and the computer screen you are looking at right now, as having been designed by some person, despite not having observed that designing or construction. Yet you look at the complexity of the Earth and the Universe, which are FAR MORE COMPLEX AND INTRICATE, and fail to acknowledge that Someone designed them also. That Someone is God, and one day He is not going to deal kindly with those who don't believe in Him.

The fact that you would pick and choose your beliefs shows that you are no less acting by faith than I am, albeit with less common sense and more closed-mindedness.

If you want to discuss the scientific evidence and how it supports creation, I'd be glad to do that, but I'll have to get back to you, as I have work to do. I've looked at the scientific evidence that evolutionists have given, and I remain unconvinced that they have any merit whatsoever.

I hope you will take the time to read the scriptures I've given you so far.

 

[TheDude]

The "Leviathan" mention is most likely a metaphor for something formidable, maybe a difficult task to overcome(?)... If you're going to take everything in the Bible at face value then in Job 40:15-24 where it indeed describes a beast similar to a Brontosaur you must then take at face value that the beast in question is indeed physically large enough to literally "drinketh up a river" & "draw up Jordan into his mouth"; I think we can agree that no dinosaur(s) (or anything else) where large enough to drink a river. These are clearly metaphors meant to describe an animal as being simply large.

 

[DLS8K]

Again, was that YOU that said that, or was that a rock or random collection of molecules? If we're all just a bunch of mass, then why does it matter so much to you?

Job Chapter 41: (By the way, Job is unanimously agreed upon to be the oldest book in the Bible)

1 Canst thou draw out leviathan with a hook?
or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?
2 Canst thou put a hook into his nose?
or bore his jaw through with a thorn?
3 Will he make many supplications unto thee?
Will he speak soft words unto thee?
4 Will he make a covenant with thee?
Wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
5 Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?
Or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?
6 Shall the companions make a banquet of him?
Shall they part him among the merchants?
7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons?
or his head with fish spears?
8 Lay thine hand upon him,
remember the battle, do no more.
9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain:
shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?
10 None is so fierce that dare stir him up:
who then is able to stand before me?
11 Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him?
Whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.
12 I will not conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion.
13 Who can discover the face of his garment?
Or who can come to him with his double bridle?
14 Who can open the doors of his face?
His teeth are terrible round about.
15 His scales are his pride,
shut up together as with a close seal.
16 One is so near to another,
that no air can come between them.
17 They are joined one to another,
they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.
18 By his sneezings a light doth shine,
and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps,
and sparks of fire leap out.
20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke,
as out of a seething pot or caldron.
21 His breath kindleth coals,
and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
22 In his neck remaineth strength,
and sorrow is turned into joy before him.
23 The flakes of his flesh are joined together:
they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.
24 His heart is as firm as a stone;
yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
25 When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid:
by reason of breakings they purify themselves.
26 The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold:
the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.
27 He esteemeth iron as straw,
and brass as rotten wood.
28 The arrow cannot make him flee:
sling stones are turned with him into stubble.
29 Darts are counted as stubble:
he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
30 Sharp stones are under him:
he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.
31 He maketh the deep to boil like a pot:
he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
32 He maketh a path to shine after him;
one would think the deep to be hoary.
33 Upon earth there is not his like,
who is made without fear.
34 He beholdeth all high things:
he is a king over all the children of pride.


Isaiah 27:1

1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

Psalm 74:13-14

13 Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters.
14 Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.

Psalm 104:26

26 There go the ships:
there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein.

Job 40:15-24

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee;
he eateth grass as an ox.
16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins,
and his force is in the navel of his belly.
17 He moveth his tail like a cedar:
the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass;
his bones are like bars of iron.
19 He is the chief of the ways of God:
he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.
20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food,
where all the beasts of the field play.
21 He lieth under the shady trees,
in the covert of the reed, and fens.
22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow;
the willows of the brook compass him about.
23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not:
he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth.
24 He taketh it with his eyes:
his nose pierceth through snares.

Psalm 53

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.
2 God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God.
3 Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy;
there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
4 Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread: they have not called upon God.
5 There were they in great fear, where no fear was: for God hath scattered the bones of him that encampeth against thee: thou hast put them to shame, because God hath despised them.
6 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! When God bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.


It's funny how you refuse to believe anything unless you see it for yourself. Do you believe in George Washington? Do you believe in Ben Franklin? You never saw these men, yet you accept by faith without questioning that they existed, simply based on the writings and drawings of other human beings. You accept every building you see around you, and the computer screen you are looking at right now, as having been designed by some person, despite not having observed that designing or construction. Yet you look at the complexity of the Earth and the Universe, which are FAR MORE COMPLEX AND INTRICATE, and fail to acknowledge that Someone designed them also. That Someone is God, and one day He is not going to deal kindly with those who don't believe in Him.

The fact that you would pick and choose your beliefs shows that you are no less acting by faith than I am, albeit with less common sense and more closed-mindedness.

If you want to discuss the scientific evidence and how it supports creation, I'd be glad to do that, but I'll have to get back to you, as I have work to do. I've looked at the scientific evidence that evolutionists have given, and I remain unconvinced that they have any merit whatsoever.

I hope you will take the time to read the scriptures I've given you so far.

I don't believe in God and I am not going to be close-minded about it. I believe there MAY be a higher power involved, however, what is depicted in the Bible is something I dont subscribe to.
The Bible has no more merit than any scientific study regarding the creation of the Universe......it is an opinion that cannot be proven. I am not going to sit here and say I know the answers to the creation because that would be close-minded and lacking common sense.
You can condemn me to the hell that you believe in but that would not be Christian of you. You can say that God doesn't need to prove his power to have it be known (familiar lesson in the Bible) and I would say that I don't need to prove evolution or science to you because even if I can't prove it doesn't mean it didn't happen/will happen/is happening. I could say you just have to believe..........but I won't.