Jack of the Dead

:P Whatever

you italicized it. what was I supposed to think?

15 “Look at Behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. 16 What strength it has in its loins, what power in the muscles of its belly! 17 Its tail sways like a cedar; the sinews of its thighs are close-knit. 18 Its bones are tubes of bronze, its limbs like rods of iron. job 40:15-18

they randomly imagine a giant beast that they had never seen before and it actually matched a description of an animal that lived before mankind existed? extremely unlikely to the point of being impossible.

wut

since the word dinosaur was coined ca. the 19th century, they had to use other words. the only word that they could use were Dragon and behemoth. and the fact that it fits the description of a dinosaur?

I said I was done, but I guess not. Evolution still doesn't make sense. I heard all you said. I understood it. but it still doesn't work. How did the big bang occur? my understanding is that infinite matter exploded and everything just happened to fall into the right place at the right time. the earth just happened to fall the exact distance from the sun to be able to support life. it was not too far so as to be too cold and it was not too close and too hot. then according to abiogenesis, over thousands of years amino acids were able to join together and for complex proteins needed for life without any guidance whatsoever. I have not seen a working model of this today. the only models I have seen of a protein being formed was using DNA to do so. defeatist said earlier that you can get something that is kind of alive and things will go from there. and you're right. there are around 20 amino acids that are necessary for life. however, there are also left and right handed versions of these amino acids. in order for it to work, all the amino acids need to be left handed. miller's experiments produced both left and right handed amino acids. right handed amino acids hurt the processes of left handed amino acids and vice versa. but I also remember something from chemistry. oxygen and ozone are two things in our atmosphere that help to block some of the harmful radiation from the sun. now, if the atmosphere was rich in methane and ammonia, not oxygen and ozone, what stopped the UV rays, x rays, and gamma rays from destroying the cells and amino acids that may have been formed? yeah. maybe it was in a cave, but wouldn't the cave be blocked from any kind of warmth that was also necessary for this to work? again, if it wasn't in the cave and covered 2/3 of the earth, why wouldn't it be killed by the solar radiation? And I still haven't seen an example of a protein that has been made without Dna. millers experiments showed that it was possible to get these, but it did not show that it was possible to make the proteins. even wiki now says that the conditions in the atmosphere for this were not present. saying that the early atmosphere has less than 5% nof the necessary compunds. also here's a little anomaly for you to think about. Dinosaurs were supposed to be extinct by the time man came around right? then how does the bible have a record of an animal that much resembles that of a dinosaur? the "behemoth" was a giant creature with a tail that sways like a cedar tree. it had incredibly strong bones and enormous muscles. (job 40:15-20) what animals in the world do you know of that fit that description? brontosaurus? and job is the oldest book in the Bible. how can it be that man knew about dinosaurs if they were lost and buried for millions of years? as for the thousand year day, adam and eve were created on the 6th day. and the seventh day was after that. even if he was completed on the last year of the 6th thousand year day, adam still had 1000 more years to go. adam was to have lived 930 years, and would have died well before the actual fall of man. the thousand year day doesn't fit in with christianity.

yeah bal my bad. (anyway, i see it as a back up mechanism in case the original system fail. points to design for me) as for everyone else, that guy is a doctor who has taught biology for a number of years of his life at quite a few universities. you would think he knows what he's talking about. therefore goodnight. I am officially done.

and you don't get the fact that it has sources and credentials to back it up. read it and decide for yourself.

you want to read it first before you make a judgement?

ok. This is an atricle written by Dr. Jerry Bergman on abiogenesis. that's what I just read.

Irreducibly complex means the organism is not hindered by losing that. while that can still live in a controlled environment, it still won't cut it. but yeah, that is an interesting example, but it's doesn't explain away Irreducible complexity.

Abiogenesis, aka chemical evolution. the one that assumes that there was no oxygen in the atmosphere and those conditions allowed for amino acids to be formed. and this was tested by miller and urey correct? well from what I read they were only able to produce about half of the necessary amino acids for life and some of them were actually the wrong kinds and therefore useless. it assumed that the atmosphere was not oxidizing, but was made of methane. while it did produce those amino acids, it failed to take into account that amino acids easily break apart under natural sunlight, therefore they would not have been able to for a protein, much less an organism. and if this theory were true, how could we have oxygen in the atmosphere today and not then? how did it change? also amino acids and polypeptide chains are more likely to break apart in water than they are to form. water being the primordial soup which all life was supposed to originate from. the other big thing is that proteins don't form from amino acids without dna.

I think free got this one.

I'm done responding to something that insults me at every turn. I haven't seen any examples of those that work. "nothing is irreducibly complex" threw out that post. go read up on the chemical processes behind blood clotting and tell me how that isn't irreducibly complex. anyway. I'm done. people aren't going to listen anyway. I knew you wouldn't because I know the people of this forum well enough to know their stances on this issue.

we do that too.

yeah. don't come to my part of texas when you die. I'll bury you outside the cemetery facing west.

we'll all know one day.

you're right. I don't have all the answers. I know I don't know everything about God. but I know that he's infinite and is actually the easiest thing to believe. have you ever heard of a Case for Christ? It can lay it out better than I can hope to imagine. and guess what, while the man was researching to write this book, he was an atheist. if you so choose you can read it and see what changed him. I obviously can't. I read the bible and I see how the pieces fit together. its not something I can change over here.

for the whole pillars thing, that actually means foundations. meaning the earth and everything in and below it. can you trace the steps of evolution? what proof from the world proves the link between man and ape? it was an assumption that there is no higher power that led to this theory. not the proof found in the world. there is no fossil evidence. no links. nothing definitive. evolution does not make sense, believe it or not. Biogenesis. life comes from life. if there was nothing alive before a certain point in time, how does it magically start living? how does the human have morality? why does the human have a capacity for the abstract and things that are above that of an animals? can you logically answer those questions? that is really all there is to it.

there is a reason why I said this.

It still tough to believe that they all came up with the same answer, a higher being or group of higher beings, out of chance. and you're right. its not fair. but that's why christians are moving in places like africa, China, and south america to spread the word. guess what, the christian demographic is skyrocketing in those places. people are getting the message. as I said to Defeatist, He made a system of sacrifice for mercy. so he made a pure human sacrifice, untainted by sin, to save humanity. Some contradictions: Good or evil? So is he god of war or of peace? Which is it? Jesus says that he is = to his father, but then says his god > jesus. Bible is still flawed then It was written by people "under the influence of god". If i were to tell you that i was inspired to make another bible for modern times by god, would you believe me? Probably not, so what makes them different? Quote PSA 145:9 The LORD is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works. JER 13:14 And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them. sounds like he's going to wipe them off the map for no reason. he's is actually punishing those that went away from him. I know it still sounds harsh, but understand, these people knew without a doubt that God existed, and they still turned away. the full chapter God is like a father. punishing where he needs to, loving all the time. understand, he is the author of all life. he chooses who lives and who dies and for what reason. he is not one dimensional, not only having one purpose like the greek gods or arabic gods. Quote EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name. this was from the Israelites praising God for delivering them from Egypt. its praising him for protecting them from egypt. ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen. this was written by Paul to the Romans. God is peaceful, according to the verse you listed above. as he is peaceful, he is a protector. He is not a God that sits around and never did anything. he is active. Quote JOH 10:30 I and my Father are one. JOH 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. this is where the trinity comes in. Jesus is God. however, his role is under that of God the Father. The three persons of God all do different things. God the father is greater, but God the son is still God.

you're missing the fact that it's a choice. mankind is corrupt. unholy. evil in nature. Don't tell me you never had the urge to do anything wrong. that's called a sinful nature. because of that we are literally separate from God. now God made an order that he was going to stick to. sacrifice for mercy. well. he sacrificed himself for complete redemtion of all mankind. all they needed to do was turn away from sin. Didn't mean they were always going to be perfect afterwards. to err is human, and christians are still human. well I find it interesting that the entire world works together. in order for plants to survive they need Carbon dioxide and light along with other nutrients. they give off oxygen. animals use oxygen and give off Carbon dioxide. the human body. irreducibly complex. its like a watch. if you take a piece out of the watch its not going to work anymore. same way with the human body. as I said earlier, you don't get that from random chance and evolution. there is too much complexity for there to not be a creator. Notice I'm not saying this prove that God is the one that did this. This just shows that there was a creator. the earth was also different back then. It had an atmosphere that was able to sustain life, like the dinosaurs that do not exist today. man could have lived for hundreds of years. there is also evidence of a great catastrophe that hit the earth. I remember reading about some digs in North america that yielded dinosaur bones. most of them were cracked or completely broken. evidence that something big hit. wouldn't a worldwide flood fit in this instance? and I would like for you to include a civilization that didn't have some sort of higher power that you can think of off the top of you head. because every major civilization recognized a higher power. and I suppose that by flat you mean the whole ends of the earth deal. that meaning that chrisitians were supposed to go to all the world to preach. and the majority of the world didn't know if the world was flat or not. it was said so that everyone would understand their mission. I've never seen anything that said the earth was supported by pillars. care to show me where? I challenge you to prove to me that the world can exist the way it has being the result of an explosion that resulted of infinite matter (aka nothing) and how things could change into what they are today and how we have no actual record in 5000 years of a species experiencing a significant change. the significance is shown above. and how does that fact that he knows all that will happen effect the premise of free will? sure, assholery helps.

well the "vestigial" organs in humans actually have a function. hair serves as a sensory function, muscles are anchored to the tailbone, and the appendix aids in digestion. (some people still count that last one as vestigial.) I think of the reproductive system as efficient. urine is sterile, and it would clean out any leftover semen that is in the urethra. and the fact is that it works really well. also, for the mutations to occur, they would have to be random. and the fittest mutation survived right? well, how do you get an irreducibly complex system out of small steps? lungs don't work without the heart. heart doesn't work without the liver, liver doesn't work without the brain. and the brain doesn't work without any of that. if you take away a step the entire organism dies.