Replies

"It isn't seeking to avoid anything. It is a conclusion drawn from the evidence. I don't understand your theological argument I am afraid. I always thought that the fig-leaf symbolised Adam's loss of innocence and emergent self-awareness without which shame is impossible."

The response of fallen man is to hide from God, or the immediate presence of God. Spirituality and Religion are two different things. Religion is the observance of God though ritual. Spirituality is the seeking of God and his actual presence. The actions of all men are RELIGIOUS, whether they are in a dead church, or are following the dead instinct to cover up and hide from God.

TOE, for all the brilliance and cunning of man (and I will admit man has devoted great intellect to this effort) is a "fig leaf!"

Is it any surprise that man would come up with a "scientific" theory in a scientific age? In the dark ages men did not have science, so they hid from the face of God in their cathedrals, in dead religion and ritual. The church of modern times is SCIENCE. The proponents of TOE are the priesthood.

All scientific argument aside...you cannot accept TOE and actually believe in the principle of redemption, which requires that there was original sin from a single set of parents.

If evolution took place, it could not have taken place for humanity. I believe species were placed in the earth as they are...they did not evolve. Whether God did this personally, through the agency of angels, or some physical mechanism...I don't really care much, I need to make a living.

We only have evidence of variation in species, which evolutionists stretch into a belief that species evolve one from another. The evidence cuts both ways, IMO, it cuts far better toward special creation.

Evolutionists can never get around the fact that the fossil record does not back the idea of slow changes from one species to another. Even Darwin was in despair at the end of his life over this growing fact. At least HE was honest enough to realize it was a bullet to the head of HIS theory.

It simply shows what I maintain: Species appear as they are, and for the most part remain UNCHANGED, or go extinct! Gould (first name Steve), a brilliant man, realized this and so proposed the punctuated equilibrium theory. A ridiculous theory from an otherwise very brilliant mind. He did this because he was driven to try and explain this terrible (theory-killing) lack of transitional forms.

You can play around with the limited plastic nature of life to your heart's content. I do not believe, and it has not been shown that species give rise to unique and various species...even given the MAGIC of millions of years.

And the physical constants of the universe make it clear to any but the most closed (and hostile to God) minds that the universe was created/designed to support carbon based life. The earth is unique in so many ways, just for this end goal it would take a book hundreds of pages long to detail all the unique factors of the earth that setup the atmosphere and conditions for life. And this goes all the way down to the subatomic level, up to the force of gravity!

Evolutionists simply express a tautology. They look at all this wonder and say..."hmmm, life appeared because all the conditions were EXACTLY preset in some way so that life appeared." Duh!!

Science is not interested in your lack of capacity to believe the ToE. If you wish to refute it you need to bring more than your personal incredulity to the table. You need to address the crushing evidence.

Steve Gould (who you believe to be a brilliant mind apart from his proposition of punctuated equilibrium) was a lifelong opponent of creationism who was angry about the way his scientific work was misrepresented and misquoted by creationists. You point him out mockingly as "(first name Steve)" without realising that Steven was chosen as the name for the "Steve's" list in his memory and honour that you traduce in the name of your cult.

Please supply a citation for your statement that Evolutionists can never get around the fact that the fossil record does not back the idea of slow changes from one species to another. Even Darwin was in despair at the end of his life over this growing fact. as I had not heard of Darwin's despair about this issue previously. (though even if it were true it would not change the modern evidence for ToE in the slightest)

BTW you have not yet explained whether you hate Father Christmas, the Tooth Fairy, Vishnu, Kali, Osiris, Zeus, Athene etc etc or believe in them. I'd love to know which it is.

I can't believe this thread is still alive and existing in more or less the same form, if larger. Most comments are, "Your problem is...," or "I'm just being logical, why are you suddenly questioning my premises?"

The response of fallen man is to hide from God, or the immediate presence of God. Spirituality and Religion are two different things. Religion is the observance of God though ritual. Spirituality is the seeking of God and his actual presence. The actions of all men are RELIGIOUS, whether they are in a dead church, or are following the dead instinct to cover up and hide from God.

Neither gets you into heaven. Neither satisfies God's sense of judgement. Thank God that His mercy is greater. He put all we need to know about life and living into one book. From beginning to end, the same God is shown, a God who, in all He does, makes both His justice and His mercy evident. Evident. Nothing Man does is sufficient to impress the creator.

To examine the creation without acknowledging the Creator is to ignore the fact that it was put together in an orderly way. The Bible is also put together in an orderly way. No theories about what happened prior to 3800 B. C. have ever brought any bit of benefit to anyone, ever.