Creation vs. Evolution

  • Thread starter ledhed
  • 9,687 comments
  • 406,847 views
Despite all of your good deeds, you, like me, is guilty of sin and deserving of Hell.
Yes, apparently my three year old daughter is a sinner and was when she was hoyed out of a notch in her mum's abdomen. Must be a real bummer not to appreciate childbirth when all you can see is another sinner slopping out.

Not sure why she's a sinner, only that some guys say that God said so. Turns out you can do nothing wrong in your entire life but, because you were born in sin somehow, you're not as good as people who are absolutely wangtubes but sing The Lord Is My Shepherd once a week. I have no idea how anyone can reconcile requirements to be classed as "good" at point of death that would include someone who rapes a baby but exclude the baby with a fair and just deity.

Anyway, this is the Creation vs. Evolution thread, not the Who Gets Into Heaven And Why thread.
 
@DCP I can't help but notice that you've come back to this thread when all the posts explaining evolution and refuting your claim about missing links are now conveniently pages back. Please go back and respond to them. I think we're all sick of you dropping away from one conversation and started up another, which you will no doubt ignore once people start bringing up convincing evidence.

Prove me wrong. Go back and find the posts that quoted you. We're all waiting for responses.
 
@DCP That I totally disagree with. It's as simple as me thinking Pokemon was real at the age of 5 then after someone told, noticed the sign and realised they were right.

Also, I would like it if you don't try to "enter" my life without meeting me in person, I've actually never watched porn and ain't a suicidal person to think of a day that I wished I was never born and the thing that got me out was, proof, evidence and what I said on the paragraph above.
 
Yes, apparently my three year old daughter is a sinner and was when she was hoyed out of a notch in her mum's abdomen. Must be a real bummer not to appreciate childbirth when all you can see is another sinner slopping out.

Not sure why she's a sinner, only that some guys say that God said so. Turns out you can do nothing wrong in your entire life but, because you were born in sin somehow, you're not as good as people who are absolutely wangtubes but sing The Lord Is My Shepherd once a week. I have no idea how anyone can reconcile requirements to be classed as "good" at point of death that would include someone who rapes a baby but exclude the baby with a fair and just deity.

Anyway, this is the Creation vs. Evolution thread, not the Who Gets Into Heaven And Why thread.

According to creationists, your child is as innocent as a puppy. All children inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Once she becomes accountable to sin when grown up, then the punishment would rightfully fall upon her, her parents, or their parents, because somewhere in that generation, someone despised God without any consideration.
"It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to him through whom they come!

There is nothing wrong in accepting Jesus in your hearts, and waiting for science to discover more awesome things. Nothing.

@dylansan, I'm not here for never ending battles. I've done enough in GT. Whenever I post something, it's always "oh that's not science, or that is nonsense, or that is etc etc". It's always the same for each mans worldview.
 
DCP
According to creationists, your child is as innocent as a puppy. All children inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Once she becomes accountable to sin when grown up, then the punishment would rightfully fall upon her, her parents, or their parents, because somewhere in that generation, someone despised God without any consideration.
"It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to him through whom they come!

There is nothing wrong in accepting Jesus in your hearts, and waiting for science to discover more awesome things. Nothing.

@dylansan, I'm not here for never ending battles. I've done enough in GT. Whenever I post something, it's always "oh that's not science, or that is nonsense, or that is etc etc". It's always the same for each mans worldview.
Well with your lack of anything to legitimate back up what you say, I can see why...
 
DCP
According to creationists, your child is as innocent as a puppy. All children inherit the kingdom of heaven.
Once she becomes accountable to sin when grown up, then the punishment would rightfully fall upon her, her parents, or their parents, because somewhere in that generation, someone despised God without any consideration.
"It is inevitable that stumbling blocks come, but woe to him through whom they come!
And if she does nothing wrong, her whole entire life, she is at fault and at sin because of the world around her?

There is nothing wrong in accepting Jesus in your hearts, and waiting for science to discover more awesome things. Nothing.
There's also nothing wrong with not believing, and waiting for some actual proof of something before you choose to believe in it.

@dylansan, I'm not here for never ending battles. I've done enough in GT. Whenever I post something, it's always "oh that's not science, or that is nonsense, or that is etc etc". It's always the same for each mans worldview.
Thats because you've made it quite obvious that you know little about the subject. If you would like for that to stop then why not just get educated on the matter?
 
Yes, apparently my three year old daughter is a sinner and was when she was hoyed out of a notch in her mum's abdomen. Must be a real bummer not to appreciate childbirth when all you can see is another sinner slopping out.

Not sure why she's a sinner, only that some guys say that God said so. Turns out you can do nothing wrong in your entire life but, because you were born in sin somehow, you're not as good as people who are absolutely wangtubes but sing The Lord Is My Shepherd once a week. I have no idea how anyone can reconcile requirements to be classed as "good" at point of death that would include someone who rapes a baby but exclude the baby with a fair and just deity.

Don't put words in my mouth. Children are not sinners in the same sense as adults are simply because they don't know better. It's my belief that any young child who dies before they've had a chance to accept Christ will still be accepted into heaven. While sin is bad, just because people inevitably will sin doesn't mean the existence of a person is bad. If a person dedicates their life to serving God's will, which is what I hope to achieve, then their good actions will outweigh their sins. It takes surrendering to Christ to earn salvation, however; not just good deeds.

And yes, as usual the thread has been driven off-topic.
 
Don't put words in my mouth.
I didn't. Next?
Children are not sinners in the same sense as adults are simply because they don't know better.
As do people with mental health problems or those who've had severe religious indoctrination. Were the 9/11 culprits not sinners, due to their brainwashing?
It's my belief that any young child who dies before they've had a chance to accept Christ will still be accepted into heaven.
Keywords bolded.
While sin is bad, just because people inevitably will sin doesn't mean the existence of a person is bad.
[Citation needed]
If a person dedicates their life to serving God's will, which is what I hope to achieve, then their good actions will outweigh their sins. It takes surrendering to Christ to earn salvation, however; not just good deeds.
Why does someone who has been good all their life need salvation?
DCP
According to creationists, your child is as innocent as a puppy.
Did you mean "Christians"? Only they've always told me that because of Adam's sin, all humans are sinners.

Don't forget, there are creationists from other religions too.
DCP
Once she becomes accountable to sin when grown up, then the punishment would rightfully fall upon her, her parents, or their parents, because somewhere in that generation, someone despised God without any consideration.
So, just to fact-check this one, children cannot sin until they're old enough? How old is old enough to sin?

What qualifies as sin? Is not accepting Jesus a sin? What if she grows up in a culture with no concept of religion, much less Christianity and the concept of having to 'accept' Jesus and is never exposed to this, but lives without performing any other sinful deeds?
DCP
Whenever I post something, it's always "oh that's not science, or that is nonsense
That's probably because you keep posting creationist nonsense.

Science is impartial, objective and, above all, always looking to prove itself wrong. Creationism is none of those things - it's taking a predetermined outcome and ignoring any evidence that doesn't fit (which is, incidentally, all of it) or seems too confusing to grasp easily (which is, incidentally, most of it) and only retroactively adjusting some words which have been translated many, many times over so that, at the very limits of their meanings, they sound a bit like the actual evidence.

There is zero objective evidence for the planet being 6,000 years old and quite a great deal for it being around 4.5 billion years old. We keep trying to prove the 4.5 billion year old thing wrong and we keep failing.

There is zero objective evidence for life on Earth being created in its present form at any point in its history and quite a great deal for it evolving via the mechanisms of natural selection from gradually less and less complex common ancestors. We keep trying to prove the evolution thing wrong and we keep failing.

There is zero objective evidence for the universe being created over a period of six days - whether literal days or allegorical days that mean discreet periods of millions of years - and quite a great deal for it expanding from a singularity that existed roughly 13.7 billion years before the present day. We keep trying to prove the Big Bang thing wrong and we keep failing.


Saying it seems too much or you don't understand bones in the ground or a 1,400 year old religious tome written in Greek says in English that it didn't happen that way is not science. It's belief.

It's totally okay not to understand it - we're not all experts at everything - but it's not okay to pretend that it isn't true because you don't understand it. I very much doubt you understand all that is required to make a computer or have it function on the internet, but they still exist independently of your knowledge or whether you believe they exist. They are the products of exactly the same process as evolutionary theory - a process called "the scientific method".
 
Last edited:
I'm not just making that up; you can take it up with God directly.
How? Has he even spoken to anyone properly and not that "In Spirit" and "Believe it" 🤬 either. If believing in the Heart of the Cards doesn't work than believing that some "upper being" can talk to you won't work either.
 
I didn't.

As do people with mental health problems or those who've had severe religious indoctrination.

You said you didn't put words in my mouth, and then you turned around and immediately put words in my mouth! :lol:

As for the mentally ill, if they are cabable of accepting Christ but do not then they will not be saved. If they aren't capable, like children, then yes, they will be saved. If someone has been "indoctrinated" to believe in something other than Christ, then they will not saved either.

Why does someone who has been good all their life need salvation?

Because it is impossible to be perfect. Only Christ was perfect. No matter how many good deeds you have done, you will always make mistakes which require forgiveness.


Prayer. I do it all the time.

No, you're not, you're just blindly believing someone who probably did make it all up.

Prove it, then.
 
I'm not just making that up; you can take it up with God directly.

And you don't see the issue with comments like this? You want to accuse others of being condescending?

Show me where this God is, and I'll take it up with him. Show me any proof of him, and I'll take it up with him. Or, more pertinently, show me any proof of Creationism. I've already provided a link yesterday on a direct example of evolution.

None of this "I believe" crap. Belief is not proof, and it certainly isn't fact. Provide examples of creationism that aren't cited in a countlessly-translated, ancient collection of stories and we can go from there. This is willful ignorance.

Prove it, then.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but you're not getting how science works. The burden of proof lies on whomever makes the claim. So start providing proof to any of these claims, especially your interesting interpretation of who is and isn't capable of being saved based on mental instability and/or age. Is there a cut-off age somewhere in this book of yours?
 
@JMoney It's not really asking since God never responds to Prayers (remeber; this is from a former Christian). Though, I'll actually try it, since you now @DCP aren't showing any signs to make your claims believeable :P.
 
^I herar about them all the time, what comes out of their mouths has nothing to support what they're saying.
 
You said you didn't put words in my mouth, and then you turned around and immediately put words in my mouth! :lol:
Uhhh, no I didn't. I pointed out that mentally ill people and the severely religiously indoctrinated "don't know better". I then asked you if they would be classed as sinners or not on this basis.

Putting words in your mouth would be if I did this:
The 9/11 culprits were not sinners in the same sense as adults are simply because they don't know better.
Or if I said "You're saying that people with mental health problems or those who've had severe religious indoctrination aren't sinners either."
As for the mentally ill, if they are cabable of accepting Christ but do not then they will not be saved. If they aren't capable, like children, then yes, they will be saved.
So let's take someone who has myriad mental health problems and kills seven people with a fireaxe because the talking walnut told them that they weren't people, only the nests of malevolent frogs that must be destroyed before they mature and take over the planet.

He's not capable of finding his arse with both hands, much less accepting Christ, so he's "saved".

Meanwhile, all of his victims were devout Trappist monks who'd not even thought about sin for a femtosecond of their existence. They are not "saved" because they didn't accept Christ...
If someone has been "indoctrinated" to believe in something other than Christ, then they will not saved either.
Why are the indoctrinated left off the guest list? They're victims of a gross and heinous offence against their neurochemistry that renders them little more than programmable drones. They are not capable of "accepting Christ"...
Because it is impossible to be perfect. Only Christ was perfect.
Who said anything about being perfect? I asked why someone who has been good all their life needs salvation. Salvation from what? Why?
No matter how many good deeds you have done, you will always make mistakes which require forgiveness.
Mistakes are sins now? Talk about a moving target!
 
How is that condescending at all? :confused:

You're telling a person that doesn't believe in God to go talk to God, someone where the only apparent way of getting a direct line to him involves "surrendering" to him at death. So do you see the problem here?

Actually He does, but only on occasion. I know many that have received responses to their prayers.

Oh yeah? Can you show me that it was God that responded, and not just the natural progression of events unfolding? How did he respond - was it in their head the same way the prayer went out?

How can one not look at that critically? Again: willful ignorance.
 
I like to think of myself as a good man. I have good morals. I try to live my life well and love my fellow man. But because I don't believe in Christ, when I die I will be placed in hell to suffer in AGONY for all ETERNITY??!!!!

You and me both, brother. This God dude sounds like an :censored:hole to me.

...wangtubes...

+10 points for the word "wangtubes". :D

...I've actually never watched porn...

You're totally missing out. I think you need an evening doing "research". ;)
 
DCP
@dylansan, I'm not here for never ending battles.
Clearly not, you're here for small battles which you can end at your convenience and begin anew.
I've done enough in GT. Whenever I post something, it's always "oh that's not science, or that is nonsense, or that is etc etc". It's always the same for each mans worldview.
You're frustrated. Boo hoo. Have you ever conidered that wasting your time, writing informative posts meant only to give you more information, which end up being completely ignored, might be more frustrating?

If you don't want to have a conversation, don't. You can't simultaneously walk away from someone and strike up a conversation with them. We're still here. We remember what we were talking about even if you would prefer to forget it.

Here it is again for reference:


They really can't. It seems like a load of nonsense to me and not Science.





No. They don't believe it because there is exactly zero evidence that this is the case. Because it isn't. The earth is not 6000 years old. Fact. Believe whatever you want. That it's a Trillion years old or was created last Thursday. It doesn't change the fact that it is 4.5 Billion years old.



Because there is actually EVIDENCE. The fact that the moon has the same rotational period. It's wobble. The composition of the rock there compared to the Earth. It all points to the fact that it was formed by a collision.



Man was aware of volcanoes and lava pits long before the concept of Hell. It's quite simple to see where the idea came from.



Which missing links would these be then?

First of all, no theory, including relativity, gravity, etc. have all possible evidence recorded for them. We have not measured the bending of every beam of light, the acceleration of every possible object under gravity. And yet no one has ever used that to discredit those theories as if they're not complete.

The important thing is that every fossil we've found to date fits into the theory of evolution.

Let's talk about the whale evolution again. The order of events is as follows:

- Someone noticed that whales and dolphins, despite seeming a lot like fish, shared some qualities with mammals, like blowholes and live birth. At this point someone made a prediction that dolphins and whales might share many more qualities, based on the idea that all species are related. An idea which comes from evolution. Without evolution there would be no reason to predict that whales have other characteristics in common with humans, and yet...

- Upon observing dolphin skulls, we find that there are TWO holes in the skull where the blowhole is, despite there being only one blowhole. No one would have any reason to predict this except with the idea that the species is related to other mammals. Certainly, there would be no reason to design them that way.

- Further, we observed that the dolphin skeleton contains bones which very much resemble legs and feet of other creatures, despite not having anything like that function. Again, no one would have reason to think these would be here, and yet evolution predicted it.

- Then we found really old skeletons of creatures that looked sort of like whales but different. They had way bigger leg and feet bones, and nostril holes in their skull way closer to the front as in most land mammals. Okay, that doesn't prove anything. But then someone predicted that we would find a skeleton with characteristics between that old whale-thing and modern whales. No one had yet seen such a creature, and yet somehow we knew it probably existed.

- Lo and behold, we then find a skeleton of an old creature - it doesn't matter how old, but it's older than whales and younger than the really old one - which has nostri holes between the front and the top. And the leg bones are smaller than the really old one's but larger and more defined than modern whales. WOW, what a huge coincidence, right? How lucky evolution got! Oh that's right, you don't believe in luck. So explain these observations and how evolution knew that they would be found before anyone else did. Seriously, explain it.

Then explain all the other thousands of similar predictions evolution has made over the past century and a half.

To repeat the question I asked:



And yet you still fail to provide the evidence (to a real standard - not one that is simply 'look its big and complex it must be God).

Have you never questioned why the only 'papers' your source site cite are themselves?


Is it now? Do you know just how many transitional fossils have been found and cataloged?

If you click on the names in the quotes it will take you to the post and you can add it to multiquote.
 
I'm not just making that up; you can take it up with God directly.

There is zero evidence than any human, at any time, has actually "taken anything up with God".

Correct me if I am mistaken, however, I'm looking for actual evidence, not belief-based stuff.
 
Back