Junior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

38 Excellent

1 Follower

About Kevinb

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

422 profile views
  1. Exodus 21:2 21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: Also as 1st reply slavery wasn't on a particular group. Rules for obtaining slaves during wartime. Moral? When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it. And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. Deuteronomy 20:10-11 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself. Deuteronomy 20:14 This doesn't sound like criminals to me teditis? The little ones too?
  2. Really... does it not talk about buying Hebrew slaves? Also if given a wife you keep them forever? Where is the evidence they were only criminals?
  3. No it says stone them... do you do that? Also to regulate abuses.. so owning people and you can beat them... and keep them as property is good in some cognitive dissonance context? Is there still good slavery now? How about just slavery is wrong period... is that not better?
  4. Yes we have laws to deal with slavery now but that's not to say it doesn't exist as you said. This is totally different from governments such as ours detailing how to own and beat people as long as they don't die within a day or 2 passing them onto your children and the rest of what the bible says about owning and treating your slaves. Oh so slavery and owning people in this way isn't a problem as long as it's not just one race? I find that an astonishing defence. Slavery is still slavery and is still wrong surely? If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” Yes I'm sure a slave if by some manner is free from slavery and being beaten will be transformed and appreciate a free life... that God granted? Surely better that God didn't condemn him to slavery in the first place. I really see no context to justify owning people subjecting them to slavery and how this is ever good. If the bible is against it in other places then surely it should be against it everywhere and not set up this contradiction in the 1st place. However there is really nothing to outright say to not keep slaves. If God can say don't eat shellfish and wear mixed fabrics why doesn't he just tell us to not own people as slaves?
  5. How is slavery moral seems to be condoned in the bible? Why would God allow this owning and beating people and passing them down to your children? Examples as below but I firmly believe that this owning people to which seems clearly slavery is always wrong and that's what should have been written. Exodus 21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant.... Exodus 21:7 If a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant.... Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. Exodus 22:3 If he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. Leviticus 22:11 If the priest buy any soul with his money.... Leviticus 25:39 And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee.... Leviticus 25:44-46 Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids. Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever. Ephesians 6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. Colossians 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God. 1 Timothy 6:1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. Titus 2:9-10 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. 1 Peter 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
  6. Interesting how people can just accept the above without any investigation but we're fine with leaps of faith i understand that. Quickly... the human race or homosapiens haven't been around for a million years..earliest fossils post pre human hominids found so far are a couple of thousand years. Like everything else language and writings have evolved from b simple beginnings. To say we have no records of eclipse prior in writings might be true but that doesn't demonstrate young earth....still need to prove 6000 years beyond just asserting demonstrates we weren't writing or didn't care too or we have found nothing so far surviving to show. Thats a huge leap to assert young earth from this. Indications are that writing took off when we had more estsblished settlements and trade. On the pot. Really that proves young earth and that proves 6000k? Let's keep in mind a hundred odd years ago when this was found we had no scientific rigor to validate. A witness statement or 2 is enough to test ? There are witness statements for alien abduction..i don't buy that either without scientific rigor and there is none. The evidence in support of the claim is so weak as to be scientifically useless. The only evidence is a letter from 1948, thirty-six years after the artifact was discovered. The letter says that the coal was not found in situbut went through an unknown amount of processing between the mine and the discovery of the iron cup after the coal was delivered. The cup appears to be cast iron, and cast iron technology began in the eighteenth century. Its design is much like pots used to hold molten metals and may have been used by a tinsmith, tinker, or person casting bullets. Without the original pot to analyze, we cannot say exactly how it was used. The cup was likely dropped by a worker either inside a coal mine or in a mine's surface workings. Mineralization is common in the coal and surrounding debris of coal mines because rainwater reacts with the newly exposed minerals and produces highly mineralized solutions. Coal, sediments, and rocks are commonly cemented together in just a few years. It could easily appear that a pot cemented in such a concretion could appear superficially as if it were encased in the original coal. Or small pieces of coal, including powder, could have been recompressed around the cup by weight. Dinosaur prints.. the established view is of course these are not human prints alongside...we aren't seeing human toes or shoes here. The alleged human footprints involve a number of misidentified and spurious phenomena. Most supposed "man tracks" in the riverbed are forms of elongate, metatarsal dinosaur tracks-- made by dinosaurs that at times impressed their metatarsi (soles and heels) as they walked. When the digit impressions of such tracks are subdued by mud-collapse, erosion, infilling, or a combination of factors, the remaining metatarsal portions often superficially resemble human footprints. However, when well cleaned such tracks show definite indications of tridactyl, dinosaurian digit patterns (Kuban, 1986a, 1986b; Hastings, 1987). Some of the reputed human prints are erosional features or other natural irregularities. They do not show clear human features without selective highlighting, nor occur in natural striding sequences (Cole et al, 1985). A smaller number of alleged "giant man tracks" are carvings on loose blocks of rock (Godfrey, 1985; Kuban and Wilkerson, 1989). Creationists often failed to exercise scientific rigor and due caution in their early Paluxy field work and promotions. Subseqwuently many also mischaracterized or minimized the mainstream work and alalyses which prompted creationist reevaluations of the evidence (Schadewald, 1986; Kuban, 1986c). However, most no longer use the Paluxy tracks among their arguments, and major creationist organizations such as ICR and AIG have advised that the Paluxy tracks not be cited as evidence against evolution. Continuing "man track" claims by a few individuals such as Carl Baugh and Don Patton have not stood up to close scrutiny (Kuban, 1989). Links: Kuban, Glen J. 1996. References: Cole, John R. and Laurie R. Godfrey (eds.). 1985. The Paluxy River footprint mystery -- solved.Creation/Evolution 5(1). (special issue devoted to the topic) Godfrey, L. R., 1985. Foot notes of an anatomist.Creation/Evolution 5(1): 16-36. Hastings, Ronnie J., 1987. New observations on Paluxy Tracks confirm their dinosaurian origin. Journal of Geological Education 35(1): 4-15. Kuban, Glen, 1986a. Elongate Dinosaur Tracks, In: Gillette, David D. and Martin G. Lockley, eds., Dinosaur Tracks and Traces, 1989, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 57-72. Kuban, Glen, 1986b. Color distinctions and other curious features of dinosaur tracks near Glen Rose, Texas. In: Gillette and Lockley, 1989, pp. 427-440. Kuban, Glen. 1986c. Review of ICR Impact Article 151. Origins Research. Spring Summer 1986, 9:1. Kuban, Glen J., 1989, Retracking Those Incredible Man Tracks, NCSE Reports, Vol. 9, No. 4, Special Section. Kuban, Glen J. and Gregg Wilkerson, 1989. The Burdick Print, Web article at Schadewald, Robert J. 1986. Scientific creationism and error. Creation/Evolution 6(1): 1-9, Further Reading: Gillette, David D. and Martin G. Lockley (eds.). 1989. Dinosaur Tracks and Traces, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (technical) Hastings, Ronnie J. 1986. Tracking those incredible creationists -- the trail continues.Creation/Evolution 6(1): 20-28. Hastings, Ronnie J. 1988. Rise and fall of the Paluxy mantracks. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 40(3): 144-155. Kuban, Glen J. 1986. A summary of the Taylor site evidence. Creation/Evolution 6(1): 11-19. The rest is debunked also but I'll stop there for now. Let's not forget our pastor friend had already decided young earth maybe ? As many do from the bible and then to go looking for corroberative "Evidence" is this objective? Beliefs forming evidence or evidence forming beliefs.... what's the best way to truth? I suggest all interested think critically about claims...research for yourselves.
  7. Neanderthals are humans? Wow...Evidence for this? Another assertion? They are not our ancestors... they are our cousins. This is the problem...genomic evidence or any other? Genome mapping for one cites this...where is your peer reviewed counter? Also... you're not concerned about the field's that corroborates evolution? The multi peer reviewed fields? Where is your scientific pubished counter? Again.. are you certain you didn't look for evidence after accepting biblical faith assertions? Dolphins having vestigial hind legs and pelvis points to creationism? Are you sure hind legs of no use in the oceans but corroberate 4 legged land walking ancestry? That the fossil record confirms in date order too? Also ever noticed how the dolphin and like mammalian spine moves up and down like the land running ancestors... not like the evolved side to side fish?😉 also substantiated by the fossil record. Counter evidence of his pleasure or short time assertion without backup? I envy the leaps you make but despite what I want i can't leap there
  8. Yep I know it's gonna be one of those kick myself things... although 2.30 am.. I'm Kicking myself to be awake... all I can manage. Any clues? 😁
  9. Hehe good pudgenik ... you've the answer though ☺
  10. I've no idea what the answer is btw...maybe it's too late here to think straight.. looking forward to the answer☺
  11. Thankfully people in the UK aren't armed. What should be happening is more regulation of dangerous chemicals. Per head attacks including fatal are less in uk than usa. E.g. the correlation between having guns and using them vs not having guns and not using them.
  12. Thought this was meant to be a humour section...its got unnecessarily serious☺
  13. Noted that you accept you're asserting. I still feel you're reading from a bias... you weren't religious before you looked into evolution? As said before you seem to accept some micro evolution it seems bizarre that you won't accept lots of small changes won't add to bigger ones over time. Maybe you're looking at things in a smaller timescale too. What were the time frames? The so called Cambrian explosion was over 20 million years. How do you explain vestigial traits ? Dna and what you can observe physically? That's been mentioned..evidence in embryology? humans have the genes to make egg yolk in development..whales growing teeth then loosing them..dolphins growing hind legs and losing them but still keep a buried pelvis and hind legs. Why do humans contain 2% Neanderthal dna? Why does a young human foetus grow hair then lose it in the womb and a mass of other things but not had this answered yet. Why do those mapping the genome say that alone proves evolution? You work in dna mapping? How do we know the species of ungulate that led to hippos through dna mapping. Evolution can answer.. the counter I'm still looking for better than lords pleasure. What evidence for Adam and eve? Descendants didn't interbreed? Also why hasn't evolution been falsified by actual scientists...peer reviewed and published.. no better way to fame than change the world and maybe win a Nobel prize ... this is how progress has been made in science for 400 years... and cannot be denied in the face of actual evidence? Yes I mentioned the dover trial but even the judge laughed at the opposing evolution stance. The main defending witness for evolution being religious too. Assertion vs evidence.... that's why evolution theory wins
  14. Else again...please give the scientifically validated peer reviewed to disprove evolution evidence for remnant dna...vestigal organs and traits... evidence in embryology ..speciation etc. Also the reviewed for things pop into existence etc? I only see and there is only bible assertions or those that have decided origins then tried to validate ie answers in creation stuff? Scientically.. and this method is the best way to truth is why this isn't taught in school as no evidence beyond faith. I'd say to deny this is perverse and I'd love to have faith again but there is no evidence and faith is what I'd need in the absence of evidence let alone to deny the contrary exists.
  15. Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007). The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial. Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merelyselection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following: Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995). Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977). Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983). A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002). Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000). In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997). Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996). High mutation rates are advantageous in some environments. Hypermutable strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa are found more commonly in the lungs of cystic fibrosis patients, where antibiotics and other stresses increase selection pressure and variability, than in patients without cystic fibrosis (Oliver et al. 2000). Note that the existence of any beneficial mutations is a falsification of the young-earth creationism model (Morris 1985, 13). Links: Williams, Robert. n.d. Examples of beneficial mutations and natural selection., Robert. n.d. Examples of beneficial mutations in humans. References: Boyden, Ann M., Junhao Mao, Joseph Belsky, Lyle Mitzner, Anita Farhi, Mary A. Mitnick, Dianqing Wu, Karl Insogna, and Richard P. Lifton. 2002. High bone density due to a mutation in LDL-receptor-related protein 5. New England Journal of Medicine 346: 1513-1521, May 16, 2002. Dean, M. et al. 1996. Genetic restriction of HIV-1 infection and progression to AIDS by a deletion allele of the CKR5 structural gene. Science 273: 1856-1862. Elena, S. F., V. S. Cooper and R. E. Lenski. 1996. Punctuated evolution caused by selection of rare beneficial mutations. Science 272: 1802-1804. FAO/IAEA. 1977. Manual on Mutation Breeding, 2nd ed. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency. Long, Patricia. 1994. A town with a golden gene.Health 8(1) (Jan/Feb.): 60-66. Moffat, Anne S. 2000. Transposons help sculpt a dynamic genome. Science 289: 1455-1457. Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books. Nachman, M. W. and S. L. Crowell. 2000. Estimate of the mutation rate per nucleotide in humans. Genetics156(1): 297-304. Newcomb, R. D. et al. 1997. A single amino acid substitution converts a carboxylesterase to an organophosporus hydrolase and confers insecticide resistance on a blowfly. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 94: 7464-7468. Oliver, Antonio et al. 2000. High frequency of hypermutable Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis lung infection. Science 288: 1251-1253. See also: Rainey, P. B. and R. Moxon, 2000. When being hyper keeps you fit. Science 288: 1186-1187. See also: LeClerc, J. E. and T. A. Cebula, 2000. Pseudomonassurvival strategies in cystic fibrosis (letter), 2000.Science 289: 391-392. Perfeito, Lilia, Lisete Fernandes, Catarina Mota and Isabel Gordo. 2007. Adaptive mutations in bacteria: High rate and small effects. Science 317: 813-815. Prijambada, I. D., S. Negoro, T. Yomo and I. Urabe. 1995. Emergence of nylon oligomer degradation enzymes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO through experimental evolution. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 61(5): 2020-2022. Sullivan, Amy D., Janis Wigginton and Denise Kirschner. 2001. The coreceptor mutation CCR5-delta-32 influences the dynamics of HIV epidemics and is selected for by HIV. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 98: 10214-10219. Weisgraber K. H., S. C. Rall Jr., T. P. Bersot, R. W. Mahley, G. Franceschini, and C. R. Sirtori. 1983. Apolipoprotein A-I Milano. Detection of normal A-I in affected subjects and evidence for a cysteine for arginine substitution in the variant A-I. Journal of Biological Chemistry 258: 2508-2513. Wichman, H. A. et al. 1999. Different trajectories of parallel evolution during viral adaptation. Science 285: 422-424. Wright, M. C. and G. F. Joyce. 1997. Continuous in vitro evolution of catalytic function. Science 276: 614-617. See also: Ellington, A. D., M. P. Robertson and J. Bull, 1997. Ribozymes in wonderland. Science 276: 546-547.