Congratulations 'Eljay',

You are the proud member a highly select group, mainly found in the US, and comprising 0,00262% of the world christian community.
You and your fellow member, futher distinguish yourselves by 'fundamentally protesting' the faith and beliefs of just about every other christians, comprising 99,997% of the lot, and covering the vast majotiry of catholics, anglicans, orthodox and protestants other than the Fundamentalist-Evangelicalists.

Amicably 'eljay', you have to admit, that that's a tall 'PROTESTING' order.

Evolution is not a religion. Religious would like to call it so but it is not. I believe when faced with the questions that science brings into play the religious had to form some kind of explanation. It still will not fit with the picture of the book they want to pass off as fact but they will believe anyway.

http://objectiveministries.org/creation/dinosaurs.html

I stumbled on this site and read the article, and thought since when did evolution become a religion? And what's up with dinosaurs on Noah's arc? Having gone to catholic school of course I never heard of dinosaurs on Noah's arc, how the heck could anyone fit dinosaurs on an arc, forget the idea that two of every thing on earth went also, which seems highly ridiculous. Though I must say the whole idea of Noah's arc seemed pretty bizarre to me even as a kid.

If creation science began in 1986, why do they think their idea is more powerful then science? I am so confused by all this new stuff happening while I was busy getting away from religion.

Wasn't there a whole stretch of time that Christians didn't believe in dinosaurs?

Is creation science a Baptist thing. It seems that the Baptists get into all kinds of things, or are other's involved?

Does it say in the old or new testament of the bible that "Thou shall not kill?"

If this is to be true then why is half of the book full of stories about killing? The many wars is about killing?

If this is true then why is there a hell that will end your eternal soul? Isn't that killing?

If this is true why must Jesus die on a cross showing us death? (I know why historically and have my reasons to believe them, but would like to know why you believe this to be true concerning the contradiction to the phrase "Thou shall not kill")

and I probably missed many many more acts of killing approved by The God of Abraham that goes with the contradiction of "Thou shall not kill."


This is a earnest question for those who study the bible, for it would interest me how it is actually interperated by those who study theology.

thank you.

Belief is faith, not fact.
Beliefs and faith only exist when FACTS do not apply. A simple and straight forward paradox that some humans have been dealing with for a long time. However, like most things, some humans refuse or simply ignore the fundamental paradox.

Those whom ingnore the FAITH/FACT paradox, insist on confusing and deceiving, rather than honoring the fundamental truth of the FAITH/FACT paradox.

More specifically, one whom believes in ‘bible inerrancy’ personally cannot logically and rationally expect to actually have ‘bible inerrancy’ to turn out to be true in real life. It is a BELIEF.
It is not founded in FACTS.
It is not founded in the dimension of verifiable reality.

It strictly belongs to the FACTLESS, UNPROVABLE, AND UN DEFINABLE domain of our reality as humans.

That domain is referred to as the SUPERNATURAL!!!

You see!!! SUPERNATURAL!!!

Supra: BEYOND nature, BEYOND what is verifiable, BEYOND what is testable, BEYOND SCIENCE!!!

To invest one’s life in thinking-up desperate schemes to link one’s faith and beliefs to a NATURAL REALITY, as opposed to the SUPERNATURAL REALITY to which beliefs and faith belong, is committing oneself to a project of deceit.

To confuse oneself in believing that the words in a book, on which one bases his faith and beliefs, could actually mutate to a smokey concept of

… FAITH MUTATING INTO believed-REAL BIBLE-INERRANCY’, to
… ITSELF MUTATING INTO believed-REAL CREATIONISTIC PREMISE FOR EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE,
… ITSELF MUTATING INTO believed-REAL INTELLIGENT DESIGN
… AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN ABOUT TO MUTATE DUE TO ITS ANNOUNCED EXTINCTION,

IS THE PROOF RIGHT THERE OF THE THOERY OF EVOLUTION!!!

But to call any part of a belief, or part of your faith, however you might disguise it into a form of reality for yourself, to call any of that REAL, or PART OF THE NATURAL, or SCIENTIFIC, IS NOTHING OTHER THAN DECEITFUL.

The debate that some have been holding, which has been opposing Evolution and Creationism is dead. There no sane debate that can be held without respecting critical thinking, and rational thought. Committing such an obvious crime in rational or critical tought, as the one that confuses FAITH AND FATS, is in itself enough to declare 'Evo-Crea' a NON-DEBATE.

The real debate, and there is one, deals with decomposition, or facing the breaking down of the profound deceit of ‘creationism’, and its bible-inerrant ‘common ancestors’.

It squarely begs the need to address the havoc that is caused, in all of humanity’s history, when humans have delusionally deceived themselves and others, by confusing their personal FAITH with FACT!!!

I strongly invite you to visit this extraordinary link which was provided by ‘Lynann’ and ‘Bushidobillyclub’ in related threads: ‘http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

It goes a long way in clarifying the FAITH/FACT confusion and deceit.

Also, catch anything 'Ken Miller'. A renowned Cell Biologist, a devout Christian, and an expert spokesperson for the scientific community in the ‘creationism’ debacle.

Eljay the top model was created from her cranium. Did you not notice it was a bust? It was built up the same way it would have if it was a human skull of a missing person. The second was an artists painting. The one with the entire body.

Oh eljay, even you watched that video on Neanderthal man. You are perfectly aware that is an accurate depiction of them. At least you weren't arguing then.

Obviously some do not know the history of the bible and how it came to be what we have today if they believe it has not been edited and converted to fit certain agendas. Look it up or here I will help.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)

Old Testament
Genesis | Exodus | Leviticus | Numbers | Deuteronomy | Joshua | Judges | Ruth | 1 Samuel
2 Samuel | 1 Kings | 2 Kings | 1 Chronicles | 2 Chronicles | Ezra | Nehemiah | Esther | Job
Psalms | Proverbs | Ecclesiastes | Song of Solomon | Isaiah | Jeremiah | Lamentations | Ezekiel
Daniel | Hosea | Joel | Amos | Obadiah | Jonah | Micah | Nahum | Habakkuk | Zephaniah | Haggai
Zechariah | Malachi


[edit] New Testament
Matthew | Mark | Luke | John | Acts | Romans | 1 Corinthians | 2 Corinthians | Galatians | Ephesians | Philippians | Colossians
1 Thessalonians | 2 Thessalonians | 1 Timothy | 2 Timothy | Titus | Philemon | Hebrews | James | 1 Peter | 2 Peter | 1 John | 2 John | 3 John
Jude | Revelation


[edit] Deuterocanonical books
The deuterocanonical books (meaning "second canon") are not recognized as part of the canon of the Bible in Protestantism, but are recognized as canonical by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. They are also known as the Apocrypha. These books came from the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Old Testament used by early Christians and Jews. They were included in the first editions of the King James Bible, but were removed from some editions by reformers during the 16th century. By the mid-19th century, the deuterocanonical books were generally rejected by Protestant Christians. Judaism used the Septuagint until about the second century AD, but doesn't recognize either the deuterocanonical or New Testament books as part of their own canon, which is known as the Tanakh.

Additions to Daniel
Judith
1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Additions to Esther
Susanna
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Prayer of Manassheh
Sirach
Wisdom of Solomon
Baruch (including the Epistle of Jeremiah)
Tobit
Bel

[edit] Copyright
The King James Version is also known as the Authorized Version. Note that in the United Kingdom, this work is still copyrighted and is subject to a eternal copyright term. Thou shalt obtain permissions to publish in England and Wales by following the guidance in A Brief Guide to Liturgical Copyright, third edition (RTF file). If thou wishest to publish in Scotland, thou shalt contact the Scottish Bible Board for permissions.




This work is in the public domain outside the United Kingdom because the author has been deceased at least 100 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

However, this work is under an eternal copyright in the United Kingdom.

What does that mean?

And you understand this sculpture was created by Forensic model makers who work for investigative authorities. They took the actual skeletal remains of Australopithecus Afarensis or you might remember her as "Lucy." Im not sure how familiar you are with missing persons but when the police locate a skull and that is all they have to go on, they employ these forensic artists to literally reconstruct the face from the ground up. The same was done with this skull. Some of these reproductions have been so close that family members have been able to identify their loved ones using them. I feel its a reasonably close replica. Here is a drawing also.

Real science is what happens when you look at the facts. Creation science is what happens when you ignore the facts you don't like.

Hey Morningsong,

Just a thought.

Your god, according to your book, is omnipotent and omniscient, COULDN'T HIS WORD EVOLVE!!!
Isn't that conceivable???

Just a hint, 99,997% of all christians accept that god's word evolves, and accept evolution micro, macro and all!!!

You understand you are not a chimp correct? A hominid is any member of the biological family Hominidae (the "great apes"), including the extinct and extant humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans. This was our common ancestor. Forensic artists made this model from her skeletal remains.



This is a fleshed out model rendition of Lucy. "Lucy" (Australopithecus afarensis) dating back about 3 million years.

Eljay most apologetics explain the passage by insisting the contradiction was caused by a later insertion. Anyone who is functionally literate can clearly see the discrepancy. The apologetics certainly did. As you wish. Believe what you want yet again in the face of stark reality.

Its because they dont have a counter argument.

With all due respect 'eljay',

I think you completely missed the point of the video.

See I would never pass myself as an expert whom could offer an expert opinion on the subject of evolution, or a whole lot of other subjects we could choose to debate on these forums.

Likewise, I wouldn't think for one moment that you would dare pass yourself as an 'expert', whose personnal opinion could be offered on these forums, with the authority of a credible 'expert'.

If that were the case, we would both be very busy delivering our expert speeches, and presenting our expert opinions in front of numerous court hearings across the country on this hot SOCIAL topic.

In short, my personnal opinion, or your personnal opinion matter very little in the realm of moving world concensus.

That you or I are convinced or not about an issue, changes absolutely nothing in establishing world concensus.

That is why I provided the Ken Miller link. The video explains in great detail, the state of US consensus with respect to 'creationism'. I warned you that it gave a summary of a recent 'down' verdict of a state court (if you wish I'll get it for you, along a long list of other 'down' verdicts from other state courts, as well as the Supreme Court 'down' judgment judging 'creationism' unconstitutional.

At that very conference where Ken Miller (a devout christian) spoke, they had been planning a debate between the Evolution side (Ken Miller), and the Creationist side.

I can't put names of the creationist guest experts because they never showed up.

Worse, they cancelled at the last minute, causing some degree of panick with the organizers, whom had turned to Miller, whom in turn graciously agreed to sum up the results of the hearings he and creationist experts had participated in.

Now, your opinion and my opinion do not matter much, as I pointed out earlier. But there are people out, whom are considered creationist experts, whom were invited to present their case AGAINST THE FUSION OF CHROMOSE #2, and THEIR OPINION WOULD HAVE MATTERED.

Unfortunately for your side, the creationist experts were at the hearings, they had been informed about the chromose #2 session months ahead, and yet, deliberately chose to present NO COUNTER ARGUMENT.

The hearings official offered them more time to provide a rebuttal! They replied that they had 'nothingm of peritnent substance' to add, or to counter with, on that specific topic.

That was the point I underlined to you before you viewed the video, and you missed it.

Your side's experts had NOTHING TO SAY, OR ADD.

That where it MIGHT HAVE MATTERED 'eljay'.

Not what you or I are convinced of, or refuse to believe in.

The STATE OF THE UNION on creationism, is that every efforts, whether through the scientific community, or the judicial sytem, are being debunked or judged INEPT TO BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOL AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

So, until the creationists experts come up with a rebuttal, or counter proposition that either the

...SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY

... or the JUDICIAL

can make sense of,

THE EVOLUTION ARGUMENT IN THE CASE OF CHROMOSONE #2, AND ANY OTHER EVOLUTION ARGUMENT OF YOUR CHOICE, STAND AS THE CURRENT SCIENTIFIC, AS WELL AS CONSTITUTIONAL REALITY OF THIS COUNTRY.


... and I understand and respect that your personnally are not convinced...

I apologize. I cant even remember who brought up this contradiction but they did and then feral and Eljay jumped in. Someone needs to just start a separate biblical contradiction thread. I agree it has no place and this one in particular is stupid. All that happened was either whoever wrote this was drunk at the wheel or someone inserted a contradictory verse later because they didnt read John 3.

The problem is it clearly states that "he (Jesus) tarried with them and baptized

And then

Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples.

So later on for whatever reason they added in this verse. Im not sure who added it or why but then they decided that Jesus was not baptizing but instead only disciples were. Maybe he was such a rock star by then and he was too hot and heavy with MM. Who knows. Im not going to lose any sleep over it.

Whats exevuting ? Ive never heard that word. Jesus used water to baptize in many circumstances. That is my understanding. Can you explain why it says that he did baptize and then it says that he did not?

Here are the versus in question.

John 3:22
After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

John 4:2
Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples.

It is this one that is understood to be a later addition, thus creating the contradiction in the bible today.