Yes, she does, because the bible says so.

That line about the "spear" vs. a "little sharp pointed stick" was too funny.

I admire your patience, saying the same thing over and over again.
Do you not feel like talking to a brick wall?

doubt she'll answer me but question to the rest in thread.

I can be objective enough to realize that everyone believes in what they want, be it religion, logic, facts, science, etc.

How does one remain objective?

one and the same

The Bible's tools to determine what was or what wasn't?

1. Accounts written by historians or writers with slightly exaggerated imagination to attract more followers.

2. Eyewitnesses that have contributed to the writings of the bible that help add accounts to some of the wars the people had to experience to make it more believable.

3. Sages/pilgrims that studied recent mythologies of Egypt/Greek/Roman to create a new stories and a foundation that worked against Jesus's actual teachings. Remember the Jews and the Roman's didn't like how Jesus challenged their belief system. Roman Emperor Constantine believed he was a God and the Jews didn't like their Torah to be questioned. Therefore, both agreed to put an end to Jesus who truly was teaching how to coexist together peacefully and was used as bait in the end to ground the very foundation (christianity) that he didn't want to happen.

Therefore the bible can't possibly tell us anything about evolution as it is not a book intended to do so. First the people at the time didn't have the technology to do so and second the book is primarily a book of recent imaginative writers who had knowledge in recent mythologies and mixed it in with accurate accounts of happenings at the time to make it believable.

***************************************************************************

The Evolutionist's tools to determine the history of our past as of evolution.

1. Recorded documents cross examined with the big three methods of research. The big three are:

a. Archaeology - the study of bones, arrowheads, fragments of pots, oystershell middens, figurines and other relics that survive as hard evidence for the past. In evolutionary history, the most obvious hard relics are bones and teeth, and the fossils they eventually become.

2. Renewed Relics - records that are not themselves old but which contain or embody a copy or representation of what is old. In human history these are written or spoken accounts, handed down, repeated, reprinted or otherwise duplicated from the past to the present. In evolution, I shall propose DNA as the main renewed relic.

3. Triangulation - This name comes from method of judging distances by measuring angles. Take a bearing on a target. Now walk a measured distance sideways and take another. From the intercept of the two angles, calculate the distance of the target. Some camera rangefinders use the principle, and map surveyors traditionaly relided upon it. Evolutionists can be said to "triangulate" an ancestor by comparing two or more of its surviving descendants.

In today's society we have much more technology to research then we did when the bible was written and therefore shows that an evolutionist will have a better chance (and have already) in showing the history of our past.

Objectivity needs open mindedness.
It means to consider all possibilities.
If you can't do that, you can't be objective.
If I wanted to, I could for every belief of mine find facts to support it, just by looking into websites, books, what ever that just bring forth the arguments I want to belief and hear.
But that's not the way it works because I would create my own reality exclusionary to other facts.
It would be a very lonely place to be.

I just post icons.

I would love to see a chimp open a nut with a three foot pointed stick.

If I remember correctly I watched a commercial here in the states about how the Earth is only 6000 years old. Later at the end it says join us for the next Evangelical events.

If I remember correctly the word fossil means a relic that dates back to 10,000 years or more.

A fossil means the original material has been subsitituted or infilirated by a mineral of a different chemical composition, therefore given, as one might say, a new lease of death.

So what I am trying to get to is that many Christians don't believe in fossils. So they must have a hard time over here in America to go to a museum to look at dinosaur bones. Perhaps they think these bones are manmade for entertainment purposes? It is really amusing to me.

Smiless many of them believe that the fossil record is inaccurately measured and calibrated using standard means to date like Carbon 14. They just assume that all of these fossils found in museums all over the world are incorrectly assessed as to their age. They realistically cannot deny that hundreds of millions of fossils reside in display cases and drawers around the world. Some of the fundies attempt to argue that these specimens, huge skeletons of dinosaurs, blocks from ancient shell beds containing hundreds of specimens, delicately preserved fern fronds, have been manufactured by scientists to confuse the public. This is clearly ludicrous. They also think they had dinosaur eggs on the arc.

Please don't lump everyone into a "christian" group. Christianity consist of about 2.1 billion people worldwide and the majority believe in evolution. For example the Roman Catholic church of 1.31 billion believes in evolution, so does the mainline Protestant church of 375 million.

It seems like many Protestants are fundamentalists however. Have you noticed that? At least on these forums anyway. I know most Catholics are okay with evolution.

It's just the ones that post here. I would say 375 million out of 800 million Protestants is a good number. The Liberal Protestant denomination also belive in evolution and the right to abortion. They don't have good number though.

I wish I could laugh about this, but I clearly find this saddening that such hard work that these people has gone through to discover what we know now is being disapproved by a foundation or foundations that only wish to stay in power of the people. This brainwash manipulation truly works for those who never had a chance for education and really takes adverse affects to our society.


Religion clearly in many ways have hindered brilliant minds to discover a great many things that we today could be having. As ironic as it might sound, I believe our planet would have been technologically more advanced if religion wouldn't have interfered with brilliant minds.

To have faith in a God and to have a listening ear for those in need is all that a religion should be doing. It should be sanctuary for food and drinks, a place for silence, and understanding is what a church or any other spiritual or religious organization should be doing only. They shouldn't be interfering with scientists discoveries by disapproving their findings or get involved in politics, or seek ways to become more powerful and influential to benefit only a few.

Fortunately, I see many countries that have already bypassed the age of religion and welcomed the age of information to understand that mythology has no place in politics, business, or discoveries.

You remain objective by making a decision
when something new that you do not fully understand
is brought forward you must ask your self a series of questions.

1) Do I know what I am talking about. When someone
mentions a shared Chromosome, or fused Chromosome do
I understand the significance of this. If not then I
must not take a stance on the evidence. That would
be objective reasoning for that evidence.

2) Am I interested in learning the significance by
educating myself on genetics and lineage, and evolution
to understand the significance of a fused chromosome? If
yes then study honestly with the same objective
reasoning used above in question #1.

3) Ask your self before coming to a conclusion, if you
have been honest with yourself and if you really
understand what you have read, or NOT read. If no,
then continue to NOT take a stance.

That is being objective. Facts are facts they are not
seen as anything but, ask yourself what conclusion can
be drawn from them, and if only one conclusion is
present that matches the facts then to be objective you
MUST accept that conclusion.

Krimsa,

Catholics, Anglicans (protestents), Orthodox, and the largest number of mainline Protestant congregations are CHRISTIANS AND SUBSCRIBE TO THE SCIENTIFIC, FACT BASED REALITIES OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION.

That amounts to 99,997% of the christian community of the world.

That leaves the remaining 0,00262% consisting strictly of 'bible-inerrancy-fundamentalist-evangelists', whom insist in opposing a litteral interpretation of genesis based on FAITH, against the FACT based scientific theory of evolution.

US fundamentalism, is a US and GB phenomenon that is traced back to the end of the 19th, and beginning of the 20th here in the US.

It is a sort of allergic FAITH based reaction against MODERNISM, which brought too many 'bible-litterate' contradictions to our fellow 'fundamentalists'.

So yes Krimsa, that fraction of 'christians' whom are often heard claiming that the other 99,997% are not REAL CHRISTIANS, are mostly here in the US.

... and yes again 'krimsa', sometimes it feels like ALL TWELVE OF THEM, are here on 'mingle2'!!!

I was arguing this point with Deb the other day on another thread but didnt have my facts straight or numbers correct. Thanks. Im sure she will see that and argue with it anyway. Its just because they surround themselves with other like-minded fundamentalists so their world view is entirely obscured by people that all share the same belief system.

Concerning cosmological evolution, the Church has infallibly defined that the universe was specially created out of nothing. Vatican I solemnly defined that everyone must "confess the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, as regards their whole substance, have been produced by God from nothing" (Canons on God the Creator of All Things, canon 5).

The Church does not have an official position on whether the stars, nebulae, and planets we see today were created at that time or whether they developed over time (for example, in the aftermath of the Big Bang that modern cosmologists discuss). However, the Church would maintain that, if the stars and planets did develop over time, this still ultimately must be attributed to God and his plan, for Scripture records: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all their host [stars, nebulae, planets] by the breath of his mouth" (Ps. 33:6).

Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.

While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in ((((atheistic evolution)))

Darwinian was agnostic
Richard Dawkins's is Atheist

and many more are atheists who have discovered great findings to add to the science of evolution.

Let's face it atheist's threaten the very foundation of any religion. They don't want atheists to succeed in proving in the future that the bible, torah, koran are all works of fiction.

The Catholic church accepts evolution to keep the peace perhaps for they have a long history of persecuting those who have found evidence that contradicts the bible. I will mention one for now (Galileo). I think they just don't want to make such a mistake again and lightheartingly accept evolution as long as in the end everyone knows God started it first.

As time goes by more will be discovered from brilliant minds that will contradict religion and when a religion foundation loses its members they will do whatever it takes (even forcefully if they can) to get their members back.

This goes for every mediterrenean mythology belief system that these billions of people follow.