DARRELX

Evolution fails at every step of the fairytale. 

Abiogenesis is impossible.

Single cell to multicellular life is impossible.

Multicellular species  evolving new biological traits is impossible.

Enough rhetoric I challenge an EVO to prove these things possible with real evidence rather then faith based claims and wishful thinking.

9 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said:

Sorry, but you have biologicalaulty reasoning there, and a mis understanding of what evolution is about.

In any form of Darwinism, yes the mechanism for change is said to be mutations. When a mutation is beneficial to survival, then the offspring of such a mutation, might survive to pass on changes to future generations.

So, let's suppose that Joe the octopus, aquires a mutation, that allows him to change coloration, to more readily blend with his enviroment. Joe's kids get to benefit from that change, and Joe's descendants are the better for it, they have improved chances for survival, that is evolution. However, Joe the octopus has a twin brother, Randy. Randy was in deeper water that day, and missed the storm of solar particals, that affected Joe, and cuased his mutation. Randy got married to Suzy the octopus, and they had lots of octopuslettes. While Ramdy's kids do not enjoy the benficial mutation that Joes kids did, Randy's kids are still capable of survival, and so they do not evolve.

Millenia later, some marine biologists get together, and decide that the offspring of Randy, and the offspring of Joe, are separate species. Today, thanks to the Society of Marine Biologist Taxonomic Committee, we now have a catalog that includes Octopusus Josephi and Octopusus Randophi. 

That is how evolution supposedly works, and it is why things to not have to evolve. A lifeform only needs to be suitible for it's environment, well enough to avoid extinction.

Variations in species is not evidence for evolution. 

Can you give examples of mutations that produce new biological traits?

According to Neo Darwinism, beneficial mutations are random and have nothing to do with the enviroment, so all species would change over time. 

Living fossils debunk that belief and you just present an argument from ignorance. 

On 7/15/2016 at 10:29 PM, LionOfJudah said:

As many have cyber stalked, it is unhealthy for us because we are allowing ourselves to be defeated even when the person is long gone and giving the person power they don't deserve. 

I broke up with a Pentecostal woman that I dated for a few months. She then created fake account to cyber stalk me so I had to create fake accounts to avoid her. 

Don't vote for Hilary

I think that Arabs by nature are very volitile people and are not easily reasoned with. 

I do not know where this idea that Islam is a peaceful religion came from unless it is a liberal Obamanation successful propaganda campaign, because Islam has roots in violence and a history of violence and the Qur'an itself teaches violence.

2:216. Fighting is ordained for you, even though you dislike it. But it may be that you dislike something while it is good for you, and it may be that you like something while it is bad for you. God knows, and you do not know.
 

A peaceful religion does not teach that fighting is ordained for you whether you like it or not. 

I could not think of anything more boring. 

5 hours ago, angels4u said:

Some may prefer not to read whole books comparing them to McCarthyites and witch-hunters.

What is a McCarthyites?

2 Peter  3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts.

Could be the last days for these mockers and the last days we will have to endure them.

We should bring before God the words of these mockers in prayer just as king Hezekiah had done with the letter from the King of Assyria.

Isaiah  37:14 And Hezekiah received the letter from the hand of the messengers, and read it: and Hezekiah went up unto the house of the LORD, and spread it before the LORD.

I remember seeing that on TV. Very bizarre. 

Romans  11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.

What does Paul mean by all Israel shall be saved?

Or rather what does Paul mean by Israel?

On 6/23/2016 at 1:43 AM, missmuffet said:

Yes, there is really a rapture. That is what the Bible tells me. The rapture of the Church before the seven year tribulation and the second coming at the end of the seven year tribulation are two different events.

I am more inclined to believe that there is no rapture like in the Left Behind books but that when Jesus returns then the world is destroyed. 

2 Peter  3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

On 6/22/2016 at 7:06 AM, Out of the Shadows said:

You started a thread with the words "There is no such thing as an atheist..."  Can you not understand how an atheist might feel like you are telling them what to believe?  I agree with you about God and the evidence, but then again we have a world full of evidence that the earth is a globe and yet there are whole threads on here with people denying it.  

I believe that an atheist chooses to believe that there is no God because they want nothing to do with Him. 

This is due to God's moral law of which conflicts with there lifestyle choices. 

They do have a set paradigm that everything has a natural explanation no matter what. 

From that they have another paradigm and that is evolution is true no matter what. 

These are set dogmatic beliefs.

Natural rhetoric and evolutionary rhetoric has become sustained by several dogmatic arguments for evidence.

This has all the hallmarks of an seclusive and exclusive cult.

Atheism has become a religion in every sense of the word because to be an atheist you have to adhere to a set of beliefs or doctrines. 

On 5/24/2016 at 11:55 PM, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

In a thermodyanamiic sense, work is defined much differently.  For example, one would not be able to say that no work was performed climbing up stairs, and then climbing down stairs.  Energy was expended going up, with no energy received going down to zero work out.  It's like telling someone running a circular race that ends at the finish line that no work was involved.  Your example is fine for those who don't know better.

I would say it is a lot of work for nothing if you end up at the start. 

My question is, is it work if we do not sweat?

Genesis 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Water is made of oxygen and nitrogen. It is inconceivable that these two chemicals are eternal. 

21 hours ago, woundeddog said:

 

 

LOL silly mistake on my part.

I am a young earth creationist. 

I do not believe that there was a gap between God creating heaven and earth and saying, "Let there be light."

Or a gap between creating the heaven and earth and the earth being formless and void. That is just wishful thinking and the arguments for a gap are unconvincing.

The idea of an old earth came from atheists, just as evolution has. The dating method for rocks has been shown to be unreliable because newly formed volcanic rock can date in the millions of years. 

So this gap idea comes from Christians who want to reconcile atheistic reasoning with scripture. 

All atheist really have for an old earth that is actually credible is light from the stars. 

I have no doubt that when God commanded the light to shine out of darkness to be for times and seasons, He made it so we can see it.

If God commands the light from any star to be seen by earth, then it will be. 

Or God could simply have stretched the light from there to here immediately. 

God created light without any source at first so He can create the Stars to shine on the earth. 

Also creationist give plenty of evidence for a young earth so why would a Christian not take that evidence seriously?

Now China is thinking of claiming the airzone over the south sea. That will prohibited any unauthorised flights into that area. 

They are bullying the Philippines and know no one can really do anything about it. 

55 minutes ago, Willa said:

so are you talking about me????

Yes if you are a living fossil 

Oh I see Bonky you are a nonbeliever 

9 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

 Interesting that you chose"fossils" to refute evolution since fossils are generally remains preserved for an(alleged)minimum of roughly 10,000 years of age.

All living fossils are dated by secular reasoning as being hundreds of millions of years old. 

Obviously they can only be as old as the ancient flood..

What living fossils also prove is that all fossils still would be alive today if they had not gone extinct as species do even up to our time. 

Extinction of some species do not prove that they are evolutionary ancestors of species today. 

Plus the fossil records are completely static and any references to transitional fossils is pure rhetoric and wishful thinking. 

There is no evidence of gradually evolving species in the fossil records and if there were there would be no living fossils. 

8 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

Would you consider yourself a young or old earth creationist ?    Just wondering,,,,                              With love-in Christ,Kwik

Yes of course

11 hours ago, Bonky said:

Except that evolution does not insist that an organism MUST evolve morphologically.   

Of course it does unless you still think along the line's of Darwinism rather then Neo Darwinism. 

If random beneficial mutations occur as Neo Darwinist claim, then it would be impossible for any species living supposedly hundreds of millions of years ago, to not change. 

If evolution were true no species could be exempt. 

Since evolution never happened living fossils make perfect sense. 

51 minutes ago, Your closest friendnt said:

But you can not say that the Catholics today are in the same position as the Jewish people, for they are worshiping Jesus Christ as the Savior of the word, the Son of God who took away the sins of the word.

 

Judging by your reply I doubt whether it will do much good to answer you but I will from scripture at any rate.

The Catholic church is much like the Jews of Jesus day. Those Jews had invented many traditions that were held as sacred as scripture and those traditions became more important than scripture. The Catholic church has done that very same thing.

Catholic tradition superseds scripture. 

You seem to think that a person can believe any old superstition or traditions or idolatries invented by man as long as they believe in Jesus. 

I disagree and will show you from scripture why.

1 John  5:16,21 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it... Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

John says that believing in idols is a sin that leads to death. 

The Catholics venerate many idols, Mary being one of them. All Catholics believe in Mary's intercession and mediation for all mankind. They have turned Mary into an idol. 

2 Corinthians  6:16  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  

The temple being our body yet Catholics agree with idolatry and there cannot be an agreement between a Christian and idolatry. 

Why, because following idols leads to false doctrine such as believing that Mary has power and authority in heaven.

1 Thessalonians  1:9  For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God.

Here we see that Christianity is about turning away from idols not turning to them as all Catholics do. 

1 Corinthians  10:7  Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play.

In scripture we see where false doctrine comes from.

1 Timothy  4:1-3 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry.

Priests and nuns are forbidden to marry which is just one of the many doctrines of demons the Catholic church has instituted. 

So the church is run by seducing spirits and demons not the Holy Spirit who will guide the Elect into all truth. 

John  16:13  Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth.

That brings me back to my first objection and that is if some one has the Holy Spirit they cannot continue in the Catholic tradition. 

Sure I do not doubt that some in the Catholic Church are saved but they will leave the Catholic Church as a result like Martin Luther. 

7 hours ago, Your closest friendnt said:

Then why do you question the Salvation of anyone who believes in JESUS CHRIST , by any other measure. Or by some inccorect practice and or understanding. 

Paul never said to the sircumsition group of those believers in Jesus Christ in Galatia that they are going to Hell.

To be a Catholic you have to believe in the authority of the pope, in the rosery and prayer to countless saint's. In the veneration of Mary and saints. In confession. In the last rites. In the power of a priest to forgive sin and not in scripture as being the sole authority of the Church. All these things are man made commandments and Jesus said...

Matthew  15:9  But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

 Mark  7:7  Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Living fossils are species that have been fossilized but still exist today.

Now the Lobster is well known

If evolution were true then no species supposedly living hundreds of millions of years ago would have stopped evolving. 

Living fossils are visible proof that evolution is not true. 

5 hours ago, Saved.One.by.Grace said:

Is the Pope and the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church saved, or are they wolves in sheep's clothing seeking whom they may devour by spreading this false gospel?

Of course I agree.

I was referring to what Ezra said about the poor adherents who have no clue. 

If a person has the Holy Spirit can they be deceived by wolves in sheep's clothing?

Can a person receive salvation by believing a lie?

I would think not to both questions.  

5 hours ago, Ezra said:

Please note this applies to the hierarchy, not the poor adherents who have no clue, but truly believe that they are in the one true Church.

Can they be saved in that situation?