 |
|
|
|
|
January 28th, 2014
10:37 AM ET
Noah's Ark discovery raises flood of questionsOpinion by Joel Baden, Special to CNN (CNN) - That faint humming sound you’ve heard recently is the scholarly world of the Bible and archaeology abuzz over the discovery of the oldest known Mesopotamian version of the famous Flood story. A British scholar has found that a 4,000-year-old cuneiform tablet from what is now Iraq contains a story similar to the biblical account of Noah’s Ark. The newly decoded cuneiform tells of a divinely sent flood and a sole survivor on an ark, who takes all the animals on board to preserve them. It even includes the famous phrase “two by two,” describing how the animals came onto the ark. But there is one apparently major difference: The ark in this version is round. We have known for well over a century that there are flood stories from the ancient Near East that long predate the biblical account (even the most conservative biblical scholars wouldn’t date any earlier than the ninth century B.C). What’s really intriguing scholars is the description of the ark itself. The Bible presents a standard boat shape - long and narrow. The length being six times the measure of the width, with three decks and an entrance on the side. The newly discovered Mesopotamian text describes a large round vessel, made of woven rope, and coated (like the biblical ark) in pitch to keep it waterproof. Archaeologists are planning to design a prototype of the ark, built to the specifications of this text, to see if it would actually float. Good luck to them in trying to estimate the weight of its cargo. So, why does this new discovery matter? It matters because it serves as a reminder that the story of the Flood wasn’t set in stone from its earliest version all the way through to its latest incarnation. The people who wrote down the Flood narrative, in any of its manifestations, weren’t reporting on a historical event for which they had to get their facts straight (like what shape the ark was). Everyone reshapes the Flood story, and the ark itself, according to the norms of their own time and place. In ancient Mesopotamia, a round vessel would have been perfectly reasonable - in fact, we know that this type of boat was in use, though perhaps not to such a gigantic scale, on the Mesopotamian rivers. The ancient Israelites, on the other hand, would naturally have pictured a boat like those they were familiar with: which is to say, the boats that navigated not the rivers of Mesopotamia but the Mediterranean Sea. This detail of engineering can and should stand for a larger array of themes and features in the flood stories. The Mesopotamian versions feature many gods; the biblical account, of course, only one. The Mesopotamian versions tell us that the Flood came because humans were too noisy for the gods; the biblical account says it was because violence had spread over the Earth. Neither version is right or wrong; they are, rather, both appropriate to the culture that produced them. Neither is history; both are theology. What, then, of the most striking parallel between this newly discovered text and Genesis: the phrase “two by two”? Here, it would seem, we have an identical conception of the animals entering the ark. But not so fast. Although most people, steeped in Sunday school tradition, will tell you without even thinking about it that “the animals, they came on, they came on by twosies twosies,” that’s not exactly what the Bible says. More accurately, it’s one thing that the Bible says - but a few verses later, Noah is instructed to bring not one pair of each species, but seven pairs of all the “clean” animals and the birds, and one pair of the “unclean” animals. (This is important because at the end of the story, Noah offers sacrifices - which, if he only brought one pair of each animal, would mean that, after saving them all from the Flood, he then proceeded to relegate some of those species to extinction immediately thereafter.) This isn’t news - already in the 17th century scholars recognized that there must be two versions of the Flood intertwined in the canonical Bible. There are plenty of significant differences between the two Flood stories in the Bible, which are easily spotted if you try to read the narrative as it stands. One version says the Flood lasted 40 days; the other says 150. One says the waters came from rain. Another says it came from the opening of primordial floodgates both above and below the Earth. One version says Noah sent out a dove, three times. The other says he sent out a raven, once. And yes: In one of those stories, the animals come on “two by two.” Does this mean that the author of that version was following the ancient Mesopotamian account that was just discovered? Certainly not. If the goal of the ark is the preservation of the animals, then having a male and female of each is just common sense. And, of course, it’s a quite reasonable space-saving measure. Likewise, the relative age of the Mesopotamian and biblical accounts tells us nothing about their relative authority. Even if we acknowledge, as we probably should, that the biblical authors learned the Flood story from their neighbors - after all, flooding isn’t, and never was, really a pressing concern in Israel - this doesn’t make the Bible any less authoritative. The Bible gets its authority from us, who treat it as such, not from it being either the first or the most reliable witness to history. There is no doubt that the discovery of this new ancient Mesopotamian text is important. But from a biblical perspective, its importance resides mostly in the way it serves to remind us that the Flood story is a malleable one. There are multiple different Mesopotamian versions, and there are multiple different biblical versions. They share a basic outline, and some central themes. But they each relate the story in their own way. The power of the Flood story, for us the canonical biblical version, is in what it tells us about humanity’s relationship with God. But, as always, the devil is in the details. Joel S. Baden is the author of "The Historical David: The Real Life of an Invented Hero" and an associate professor of Old Testament at Yale Divinity School. The views expressed in this column belong to Baden. soundoff (5,820 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next »
« Previous entryAngry birds! Pope's peace doves attacked
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Me and Superman got in a fight
I hit him in the head with some Kryptonite
I hit him so hard I busted his brain
And now I'm dating Lois Lane
Well, me and Batman, we had one, too
I hit him in the head with my left shoe
Right in the temple with my left heel
And now I'm driving the Batmobile
How about a *spoiler allert* before you tell us how the movie ends?
They haven't even released it yet!
*snerk*
Message to LVH, L and others of similar ilk.
I'm invisible to you. I make marks appear on a small glass wall in your room, as though by a moving hand. When you see those marks, my words to you form clearly in your mind, although I have not made a sound.
Therefore I am your one true god and you must believe and do all that I tell you.
"Knowledge is exploding as never before. But this is happening amidst ever greater human suffering, unhappiness, discontent, violence, war, and confusion. Why is there such ever-worsening moral decline alongside astonishing materialistic progress? " (rcg.org)
There isn't. Our collective morality as a species appears to be improving.
That depends on your definition of morality...
Oh you mean like the people that came to America and stole the land from the Native Americans and then almost killed them to extinction, then burned women at the stake for falsely accusing them of being witches, then enslaving African Americans and treating women like second class citizens....yeah....we've gotten more moral by fixing all the wrongs Christians have done.
Saint LofA
Well at least your getting around to agreeing there can be more than one definition of morality, other than the biblical nonsense. BTW I break your ridiculous the first four commandments on a daily basis and am quote proud to do so.
David,
Tell me EXACTLY how many women were burned for being a witch.
How about we call the torture they christians did in Europe for hundreds of years immoral, and compare that to what is going on now as an improvement?
David,
You are describing America, not Christianity.
quite proud to do so.
Rephrasing:
Knowledge is exploding as never before. But this is happening amidst ever greater human suffering, unhappiness, discontent, violence, war, and confusion. Why isn't the human condition improving alongside this astonishing materialistic progress?
Charm,
You can refuse to repent of your transgressions of the law, and you can deny Christ until death – but there's hell to pay.
"You are describing America, not Christianity."
Take a history class, let's vote this the dumbest comment today.
"Knowledge is exploding as never before. But this is happening amidst ever greater human suffering, unhappiness, discontent, violence, war, and confusion. "
Another great example as to why xtians breed negativity and why it's so bad for our society.
How many witches were burned just in America or throughout all of Europe from the beginning of Christianity to the present?
Pete, they want our lives to be miserable so they can sell their religion.
Pete:
Just in America, as that was the context of David's post.
Saint LofA
If you are trying to scare me into believing in your nonsense it didn't work? My god you people are the most persistent in your delusion. Screw your god let his all powerful nastiness strike me dead if it exists, missed again, useless stupid god you have there Saint Larry.
What LoA is trying to point out is they weren't burnt, they were executed by hanging.
None were burned, they were hanged. Does that somehow make it right?
Saint LofA
One is too many, a hundred is not enough, witch burning anonymous.
I know what he is trying to do. My feelings is that if even one was executed for being a witch that is one to many. In Europe you most likely had thousands being killed every year for several centuries so it will add up pretty quickly.
In Europe.... between 40-100k were killed by various means.
That seems like a pretty conservative estimate to me.
Daniel 12:4?
So where exactly is all the suffering where it hasn't been before?
there is no god.
all the rest that we argue about is just noise.
it enables christians to duck and weave and dodge and obfuscate and lie and pout and whine and threaten and flee
when all we need to know is that there is NO evidence for any god. not one iota. never has been, never will be.
all the rest of the arguing about the stories in the Christian story book is just noise.
First we need to show that the bible is babble. Easy enough to do.
Then we can poke holes in every other major religion.
THEN we can conclude no god exists.
Prove it.
no evidence for a god. zero. zilch. nada.
maybe no evidence for the Cristian god but i can look out into the sky and see my Goddess in fact i can look into the face of a child and see the great goddess the creator and the creation.
Ultimately, anyone who is trying to convince another person of his position must shoulder the burden of proof. If someone who believes in God wants to convince someone who doesn’t, then he must offer evidence for his case. If a person who does not believe in God wishes to convince a believer, then the burden of proof is on him.
Therefore, if you are an atheist, you do indeed have to shoulder the burden of proof if you want to convince others of the claim “There is no God.” That is as much a claim to knowledge as “There is a God.”
Fred
So what's your proof that Santa does not exist? Don't have it? Then why not believe in him?
I don't believe in Santa. It is not like Christians are total idiots that you can make believe anything you want, like in the existence of unicorns or teapots floating in space. It is a logical fallacy to insist that belief in God is the same as belief in fictional characters.
first off there are teapot floating in space, we sent one up in a time capsule, and unicorns are just rhinos didn't you read the Bestiary and like you Jesus Santa did exist hes dead now, just like Jesus.
Fred
" It is a logical fallacy to insist that belief in God is the same as belief in fictional characters"
How so? Your god is fictional to most of the planet.
Actually fred, you are wrong. Until proven otherwise god is entirely fictional and just the same as believing in big foot.
I don't believe you honestly believe in Santa. I think you are just using that as an analogy. If I had a nickel for every time an atheist used that analogy I would be rich.
wait big foot your going to far, big foots real,.. (i have to say that i live in big foot country and my economy depends on it)
Fred
"If I had a nickel for every time an atheist used that analogy I would be rich."
It's used frequently because it's valid. We can't help it that you're unable to come up with a valid response.
Nerdo, to ask for evidence of non-existence is absurd. There is no evidence God does not exist. What "evidence" could there be? Think about it. What possible evidence of non-existence can there be? By definition, there is no evidence of a negative. What evidence is there that Santa Claus does not exist? What evidence is there that the Hindu god Shiva does not exist?
That is the fundamental difference between there being no proof of a fact and there being "no evidence of a non-fact." The latter is meaningless.
There is certainly evidence that the pizza I made last night doesn't exist. It was yummy.
If some angst-filled teenager posts as "dyslexic dog" (or some other type of derogatory name against God believers) that there is no god, the onus is on that kid to prove it. Most of us can see through this as a troll posting crap.
We have been trying to figure out if doG is a 14 year old shut-in or a 55 year old shut-in.
Perhaps you'd care to show us how you've proven Zeus does not exist?
Nerdo posts like shit, smells like shit, and eats shit.
You cannot make a negative absolute claim.
Great, so you cannot say the Indian God Shiva does not exist, and that makes you agnostic.
Exactly!
amen!
That was sarcasm by the way...
Of course, the word of God gives exclusivity to the one God who reveals Himself as "I AM."
So, LoA, then you must accept that just because you cannot disprove a god, that is no evidence of its existence.
so Will.i.am is your god?
I'm not that into His music.
the word of God
---
"Can we get this too, or is it just reserved for you? We'd love to read it. Wanna read our books about God?"
yours,
people living in areas of the world with no christianity
Colin,
I can't see everything, nor know everything. But I do know God, and His word tells me that He cannot lie. So when He tells me that He is God, and there is no other, I believe Him.
LoA
"So when He tells me that He is God, and there is no other, I believe Him."
Does he tell you there is no other, or that you are not to worship any other?
Heinrich,
Have you not read Isaiah?
LoA
"Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me." Isaiah 43:10
Got it. Just checking.
His word tells me that He cannot lie.
----
He didn't write the word, human beings did. Human beings can lie.
LoA
"You cannot make a negative absolute claim"
How can you make that statement and then so readily dismiss Colin's response? Double standard.
No, it's not a double standard. I take the word of the God whom I know, and who knows everything. When He tells me that He is the only one, I know He tells the truth because "God cannot lie."
No, you take the word of something someone wrote in a book, that's all, and then claim that trumps everything else. Pathetically weak, and still double standard.
Live4Him.
We are gather information for this year's Nobel Prizes. We believe you may have some startling new theory – that the entire Universe is less than 10,000 years old and began with two human beings and a talking snake. That is AMAZING. But, just a few questions for you, before we overturn virtually all of biology, geology, astronomy, cosmology, paleontology, archaeology and linguistics.
1. What scientific papers have you ever had published, what years, in which reputable, peer-reviewed journals and on what topics?
2. Where did you get your degree(s) and what were they in?
3. What evidence do you have to support your "six days and a talking snake" theory? Now, I don't mean what evidence do you have to refute alternative theories, such as evolution, we get that you reject it, but what positive evidence do you have to support your theory?
We look forward to receiving your answers, so we can go ahead and inform every professor, student, graduate student and worker in the above fields that they are wrong and you are right. I'll be dam.n curious to know how they
(i) found so much coal, oil and natural gas
(ii) fooled themselves into thinking they could see stars more than a few thousand light years away;
(iii) got the fossil record so horribly wrong;
(iv) totally fooled themselves into thinking that DNA mapping and analysis totally coroborated their erroneous view of the fossil record;
(v) developed theories of plate tectonics that had the various continents moving around at the speed at which a fingernail grows;
(vi) so scr.ewed up their understanding of how the Earth formed from interplanetary dust over billions of years;
(vii) thought the sun was about 5 billion years old;
(viii) so horribly erred in thinking the thousands of fossils we have of hominids from Ethiopia, Chad, Tanzania, South Africa, Croatia, Israel, Germany, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia, Moldova, the Ukraine, Java, China, the Philippines, Iraq, Pakistan and Iran painted a picture of man gradually evolving from a common ancestor we share with today's ape;
(ix) thought Amero-Indians had occupied the Americas since about 30,000 years ago based on the Clovis and other artifacts found scattered throughout both continents;
(x) fooled themselves into thinking Australian Aboriginals have inhabited that continent for about 40,000 years based on extensive finds in the South East of the continent;
But, I look forward to totally rewriting the text books of every major University and college in the World.
I agree Live4him deserves to be mocked occationally, but let's be fair.
It was a 'serpent' that spoke to Eve, not a 'snake'.
my ancestors Nadia & Nuada cam to earth from Avalon some 5000 years before Adam and eve were did they live.
and before Nadia or Babd was born Macha waited here for her husband Nuada to get here with her sister bridged and her bother Cernunnos for 2000 years. in fact adam wouldent have been made till Babd birthed Nemain the 3rd of my most sacred ancestors. together they make the Morrigan
before their was the word of god their was Badbs
Peace to sky. Sky to earth. Earth under sky, strength in each, a
cup full, full of honey, mead in plenty. Summer in winter, spear over shield, shield
over fist. Fort of spears; a battle-cry, land for sheep, bountiful forests
mountains forever, magic enclosure. Mast on branches, branches heavy, heavy with fruit,
wealth for a son, a gifted son, strong neck of bull, a bull for a poem, a knot on
a tree, wood for fire. Fire from stone. Stone from earth, wealth from cows, belly of
the Brú. Doe cries from mist, stream of deer after spring, corn in autumn, upheld by peace. Warrior band
for the land, prosperous land to the shore. From wooded headlands, waters rushing, “What news
have you?” Peace to the sky, life and land everlasting. Peace.
then her prophesy which is coming true mind you
I shall not see a world that will be dear to me.
Summer without flowers,
Kine will be without milk,
Women without modesty,
Men without valour,
Captures without a king.
... ... ...
Woods without mast,
Sea without produce,
the cross shall replace the circle,
... ... ...
Wrong judgments of old men,
False precedents of brehons,
Every man a betrayer,
Every boy a reaver.
Son will enter his father's bed,
Father will enter his son's bed,
Everyone will be his brother's brother-in-law.
... ... ...
An evil time!
Son will deceive his father,
Daughter will deceive her mother.
thanks for all your work on that. 🙂
I think we have a Holy Roller on the loose trying to remove all comments he considers to be blasphemy.
So i feel the obligation to re-post things he/she would object to.
It's just a person who is a coward with no personal integrity.
Seems like the really awkward questions to belivers are being moderated.
Double Standard.
Some believers have a deep double standard on evidence (forget proof). They allow extraordinarily tenuous evidence for near death experiences, creation science, etc. as a basis of their argument. They then poo poo mountains of objective evidence for evolution, Big Bang, etc.
That's your choice to accept subjective evidence more than objective evidence. But at least be consistent and say, I believe in God, I feel God, and that's good enough for me. When you allow weak evidence for your position and discount strong evidence in the opposing position, you lose all credibility.
@bostontola : Some believers have a deep double standard on evidence (forget proof).
And what evidence did you provide in this post to support your postulate? None.
@bostontola : you lose all credibility.
Ditto.
<><
Can you not read. He gave examples in his post.....
@Colin : Can you not read. He gave examples in his post.....
Perhaps I missed his quote. Who did he quote and what did that person say? All I saw was his own words and opinions.
<><
like when you quote the opinions of the primitive goat herders who wrote your book.
@Dyslexic doG : like when you quote the opinions of the primitive goat herders who wrote your book.
Opinions or objective history?
<><
Can you have objective history when the events weren't recorded?
"Opinions or objective history?"
The world's largest research center has already shown that the bible is not an historical doc.umnet because it contains folk lore.
L4H
The history of your posts is in this blog, why go back and gather them, when just a little effort you can see them.
YOU do post a great deal of misinformation such as when you tried to compre the ark to chinese boats and a grek vessel...the chinese boats were from the 15th century, the greek ship from around 200 bc...one, far advanced in technology, the grek one..from the bronze/iron age, when Noah was from the stone age....Stone age tools could NEVER build an ark...comparing it to the chinese boats is like saying the wright brothers built a 747 from their material and tools...an impossibility. Noahs ship would never float..simple as that...just one of the IMPOSSIBILITIES in the myth.
"objective history" As someone with a degree in History, I can tell you that there is no such thing. All history is subjective, if for no other reason than it is a human invention.
"And what evidence did you provide in this post to support your postulate?"
Look around, everybody sees it.
@Heinrich : Look around, everybody sees it
Whatever you say or want to believe.
<><
Do you believe the creation museum to filled with fact L4H ?
I cannot render judgment on that which I haven't examined. Have you been to it?
You know immediately that it cannot be accurate as creationism is debunked.
L4H: Really??? It's called the Creationism Museum...what would you expect to find in such a place?
@In Santa we trust : You know immediately that it cannot be accurate as creationism is debunked.
So, you believe in jumping to decisions based upon apriori beliefs. I prefer to be objective in my analysis.
<><
@truthprevails1 : It's called the Creationism Museum...what would you expect to find in such a place?
So, you believe in jumping to decisions based upon apriori beliefs. Why am I NOT surprised. It seems that most atheists reject the facts in lieu of their apriori beliefs.
<><
L4H
If you worked in a Chicken Farm in Nevada until you got to old to attract customers it would be fair to ass ume you were a wh0re? You see how that works, another example if you were a crew member on a naval ship it would be fair to ass ume you were a sailor (but again in your case the onboard wh0re).
You can be there in the click of a mouse L4H take a tour – are they facts ?
L4H, Just because I have not visited the museum it does not mean that I am unaware of its intent and content – both of which are fraudulent.
L4H
You do realize that a priori has a space between the a and the priori, right?
L4H,
Your response is in fact evidence of my "postulate". Creation science has almost no objective evidence, there are speculations and positions on the validity of actual science.
There are textbooks full of evolution science with tested and validated hypotheses. Same for the Big Bang. Your blindness to these realities is a symptom of the double standard I brought up.
@bostontola : There are textbooks full of evolution science with tested and validated hypotheses.
Sure, but scientific hypotheses are never proven, but only falsified. So the question is How much evidence FALSIFIES evolution? not how much supports it.
I don't know if you watched the movie My Cousin Vinnie, but an excellent example from that movie demonstrates my point. (I'm paraphrasing here so give me grace on the words. It is when Vinnie is talking with his cousin in jail about the upcoming court case.)
They're going to show you their evidence. They will show you the height and the width. They're going to try to make the evidence appear like solid bricks that make up this wall (i.e. jail wall) But that evidence is as thin as this playing card (from a deck of cards). And when I get finished with their witnesses, their evidence will collapse like a house of cards.
Vinne did just what he promised. The same is true of scientific inquiry. It's not the evidence that wins a theory's acceptance, but the lack of ability to FALSIFY the theory. Unfortunately, evolution is constantly being falsified and no single theory really exists. This is why a one never sees a detail evolutionary tree, and 'misidentified' species are constantly changing branches. No two evolution experts can come to an agreement on evolution – except that it happened. But, just because they WANT it to be valid (for financial gain among other things), it doesn't make it valid.
BTW – I'm out of here for now.
<><
L4H,
Why would thousands of scientists throw away their life's work if evolution has been falsified. Your statement is false. I have personally studied evolution in a university, and the evidence is deep and wide through many different disciplines (chemistry, biology, archaeology, geology, etc.).
"The bible is all the evidence anyone needs."
– Topher
The bible contains no reliable evidence. Hearsay and myth.
I'm ok with that position. It's a choice to live with belief over evidence. I have a problem when a believer tries to use pseudo-logic, subjective feeling, and unsupported assertions as evidence.
Good points. I am yet to hear an evolutionary biologist claim that they accept Darwin's Theory of Evolution because:
1. They had an experience one day and now feel "born again" after Charles came into their lives.
2. Evolution is written about in a 2,000 year old book of late Bronze Age and Greco-Roman Jewish mythology.
3. It makes them moral and good.
4. "Well, how else could it have happened."
I guess we rational people just hold ourselves to a higher standard than the sky-fairy believers.
Some of those sky-fairy believers have contributed more to advancements in science and technology than you personally have. In fact, if you decided to receive a degree in science, most likely you would have a sky-fairy believer teaching you. And if you expressed your philosophy most would ignore it as arrogant and troll-like messages one might find on a belief blog.
And some of them were likely Atheists who couldn't admit to disbelief for fear of what the consequences would be.
Maybe. But today there are a significant number of people who believe in God that demonstrate rational thinking in a manner that puts Colin's "sky fairy" opinion to shame, and they aren't scared atheists afraid to admit what they actually believe.
yes, but they contributed by using their brains, not shutting them down as many otherwise bright people do when it comes to their religion. How else do you explain grown adults believing the most childish, puerile of things like a man rising from the dead, a worldwide flood less than ten thousand years ago, water changing into wine by magic, a talking snake, etc., etc.
Yes, for the most part religious people have demonstrated they are fully capable of contributing to advancements in our scientific and technological advances. Too bad you have failed to demonstrate you are capable of doing that.
*"contributing to advancements in our scientific and technological knowledge"
AE why do you change names all the time? You aren't fooling anyone.
What? I, along with 99.999999% of the World, am not a cutting edge scientist. So what? Many atheists contribute to cutting edge sciene (proportionally, many more than Christians). I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make.
Pete, who are you? AE?
Colin, my point is you are not one of the rational thinkers.
L4H
Do you have any idea that billions of people do not believe in the concept of "sin" as portrayed in your Christian mythical book including me? If so why do you insist on placing your standards on me, butt out.
If you into charming Quark, you must be a Dabo girl, right?
CD
What is a Dado girl, too lazy to look it up? If given the choice I would Charm Cobras as a side line, then sell the oil to the gullible when the snakes croaked!!!
Did everyone else just lose a couple of pages? Lost all my comments when needling Saint LofA, pity.
someone likes Ham ?
Yup the troll starts deleting comments when they're loosing the argument. Classic case of being a coward with no personal integrity.
Yup
Definition of a fundie Christian? I'll have to remember that.
Do you think a troll works for CNN?
No, it's a person like you.
@Yup : No, it's a person like you.
I don't work for CNN. Therefore, I don't have the power to delete posts. Even if I were to mark a post as 'abusive', it wouldn't be deleted until others did the same. I've had MANY of my posts so marked, and rarely see them disappear. When they do, it is usually hours later. I haven't been on the forum for most of the day and only been on for about 20 mintues. That leaves me out. So, what's your NEXT false accusation?
<><
As your bible predicts that your ilk will be falsely accused, do you really have any right to complain when it happens?
L4H has reading comprehension issues.
Sad, seems we've been stuck on this page all day.
Are more conversations gone?
Looks like it.
Yep, it happens
Christianity is the only religion that will ever be challenged , the more it is challenged the stronger the case!!!
Those who have seen the light have seen the light, those who are in darkness will sadly, continue in darkness!
What an amazingly ignorant statement.
All without one shred of evidence. Carry on.
“Nobody's perfect. Well, there was this one guy, but we killed him....”
― Christopher Moore,
Christopher Moore is brilliantly hilarious.
Christianity has a history of not only challenging, but destroying other religions. How many people throughout history have been killed by christians for refusing to bow to the god of the bible? How many tortured or enslaved? You are ignorant of history, David, and should be ashamed.
“The glory of Christianity is to conquer by forgiveness.”
― William Blake
Quotes don't change reality. But your use of quotes implies that you are unable to defend the violent history of the church and are forced to resort to the meaningless words of others.
Probably like you, I am not violent. I know for a fact that there have been violent Christians in the past. Just like there have been violent atheists, Muslims, Jews... pretty much every belief system has an ugly past. I'm not guilty of any violence done by others in the past though. Most Christians I know are peace loving. Just like the atheists, Muslims, Jews... pretty much everyone. Of course there are exceptions.
I have to agree that holding people in the present for the sins of people in the past is completely immoral. Thus the Christian god is immoral.
That was supposed to say that holding people in the present RESPONSIBLE for the sins of the people in the past is immoral.
I don't think God is holding people accountable for the sins of other people. But there are natural consequences that will occur due to the sin of other people. That is what causes suffering and turmoil.
We are all being held responsible for the sins of Adam and Eve, at least according to the bible. Luckily for us they never actually existed and that part of the Bible is made up.
I don't think God is holding people accountable for the sins of other people.
Then you don't understand some of the fundamentals of your religion. We are all born with the inherited sin of our oldest relatives (Adam and Eve). That is why we need to be saved. Hence the savior.
Yes, we all have to deal with the consequences of our ancestor's shortcomings.
"I don't think God is holding people accountable for the sins of other people."
All a comment like that shows is that one doesn't know their own holy book. Had Adam and Eve, unbeknownst to them (they didn't know they were making a mistake until after the fact), not 'disobeyed' there apparently would not be sin and the rolling ball effect of god attempting to rid the world of 'sin' would not have been started. Apparently the next best thing, after this god couldn't fix the mistakes was for him to allow his child to die for those sins and the future sins of generations upon generations of non-existent humans. Now when christians view 'sin' they blame it on 'satan', yet satan is a direct creation of the story-that is partially where your god holds people accountable. The purpose of baptism is to cleanse an innocent infants 'soul'. The belief system teaches that we are born sinners and this inherently bad.
I have no idea, but most Christians sure don't act like their belief will be stronger with more challenges.........the way they b!tch and moan about any little hint that some part of their beliefs might be wrong.
Also, if your statement is true, there's ZERO reason to witness and desire conversions from nonbelievers. Don't know if you meant to say that or make your opinions hypocritical or not.
That is the absolute truth!
"Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid."
You clearly do not understand the word "truth"
@igaftr
Not only do I understand Truth, I KNOW truth. Truth is a person. His name is Jesus Christ!
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Truth loves you friend... and wants His Holy Spirit to dwell in you and teach you ALL things, and bring all things to your remembrance.
See...clearly do not understand the word "truth"
And Jesus has been dead for 2000 years...he does not know me, and he does not know you. You do not know him...you know the idea of him.
I KNOW truth
--–
Another fine example of christian arrogance.
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. "
Jesus must have been quite the egomaniac, possibly the result of mental illness.
Only known quote from Jesus... "It is better to burn-out... than to fade away!"
Madtown...
once you start applying the Word of God to your life, you will no longer see those who read, believe and apply the Word as arrogant.
Arrogance is using the very limited knowledge that you have and thinking that you can use it as a mold to fit God in.
once you start applying the Word of God to your life
----
If God has written words, I'd be very interested in reading them. Where can I find them?
So you agree with the OP that witnessing for your faith is a total waste of time and Christians shouldn't do it? Interesting.
"Witnessing" / disciplining the nations can never be a waste of time! It's what we're called to do.
It demonstrates obedience and builds character.
"The one who serves God is being transformed in his mind. He yields his own will and seeks to replace it with God's will in all matters. He seeks to please God – not self."
"Disciplining the nations?" Lmao
JB
"witnessing"
hilarious.
You have things happen, then you atribute them to your god, even though there is NO evidence that your god did anythingm, and there are other explainations...then you take that fale conclusion and claim witness...even though your god told you not to bear false witness....hilarious...clearly the work of satan what with all the confusion and such.
Satan has you so confused you actually believe the bible, which is the word of satan.
It's weird how Jesus Beloved agrees with posts that he doesn't understand. The Opening posts logic makes witnessing irrelevant, but JB can't figure it out.
Cpt. Obvious: So you agree with the OP that witnessing for your faith is a total waste of time and Christians shouldn't do it? Interesting.
Jesus' Beloved: "Witnessing" / disciplining the nations can never be a waste of time! It's what we're called to do."
Clearly I responded to your comment. In my response, I disagreed with the premise it's a waste of time to witness. I did this by saying "... CAN NEVER BE A WASTE OF TIME"...
Next time for your benefit I will clearly state. I DISAGREE.
So you both agree with the post when you say it's "true," and then disagree with a part of it because it's not true? What strange behavior you christards have!
@david:
LIGHT: knowledge
DARK: ignorance
hmmmmm so which group does that sound like exactly?
1) THEIST
2)ATHEIST
When you go around "evangelizing" at the point of a sword, exploiting poor people by promising to build wells so long as you can also indoctrinate their children, trying to pass laws to deny civil rights because you don't like what someone does with another consenting adult in the privacy of their bedroom, teaching your religious beliefs as science in public schools and denying women the right to make their own health care decisions, you can expect to be challenged.
You are free to practice your religion in your homes, churches and private schools. Respect the rights of others to do the same.
There is such a thing a former christians you realize?
The evolution debate is tiresome because the deniers don't bother to learn about it. Their only sources of information are apologetic or otherwise biased in favor of religion. Nearly every statement on this comment page made by deniers is false or twisted in some way. It's often said that in general atheists know more about the Bible than theists do. It would be nice if the evlolution deniers would make an effort to learn what evolution really is, instead of going by what someone told them it is. Then we can have a debate on the actual merits of evolution, not some warped view of it.
They'd further need to understand what a scientific theory is but most don't care. If it doesn't meld with their creation (incest) story they get all teary eyed and weepy, seeing their belief breaking down and deny it at all cost. Any evidence that tears away a layer of their precious belief system frightens them.
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”
― Galileo Galilei
I really don't see any point in trying to debate people who are influenced so strongly by emotional attachment. If you are in constant contact with a family member or college roommate or something you might get somewhere, but debate in this kind of forum just helps us understand one another's positions and just maybe lays some seeds for thought later. It is unlikely anyone here would change anyone's mind in the short term. Emotion generally outweigh's evidence in these cases.
Seriously!
The 5 laws of the Theory of Evolution have proven their validity thousands of times by millions of people.
The principles are practically applied on a daily basis in fields like medicine, geology, mathematics, molecular biology, robotics, chemistry, astrophysics, agriculture, epidemiology, aerospace engineering, architecture, data mining, drug discovery and design, electrical engineering, finance, geophysics, materials engineering, military strategy, pattern recognition, robotics, scheduling, systems engineering etc.
Tangible proof can be found by studying vestigial features, ebryonic development, biogeography, DNA sequencing, pseudogenes, endogenous retroviruses, labratory direct examination of natural selection in action in E-Coli bacteria, lactose intolerance in humans, the peppered moth's colour change in reaction to industrial pollution, radiotrophic fungi at Chernobyl... all of these things add to the modern evolutionary synthesis.
We have directly observes speciation in Blackcap birds, fruit flies, mosquitos, mice, Shortfin molly fish and other specimens.
Some of the methods used to determine the age of the planet include:
Stratigraphy, Dendrochronology,Obsidian Hydration Dating, Paleomagnetic/Archaeomagnetic , Luminescence Dating, Amino Acid Racemization, Fission-track Dating, Ice Cores, Cation Ratio, Fluorine Dating, Patination, oxidizable Carbon Ratio, Electron Spin Resonance , and Cosmic-ray Exposure Dating.
Evidence for the Genesis Creation account comes from The Bible and... nothing else, I'm afraid.
- Doc Vestibule
so Topher, when you say "it's a belief system with zero evidence", you move yourself from a devout Christian with occasionally an interesting point to argue, to an as.sho.le. And I can't remember the last time I used prof.anity on this blog. Please Topher, try and keep what little credibility you have.
n 2008, Professor of Biology Alexandre Meinesz highlighted the dilemma. He stated that over the last 50 years, “no empirical evidence supports the hypotheses of the spontaneous appearance of life on Earth from nothing but a molecular soup, and no significant advance in scientific knowledge leads in this direction.”
What does abiogenesis have to do with evolution?
Oh, that's right. Nothing.
Would you accept that the bible is wrong because the printing press hadn't been invented when the gospels were written?
How entirely stupid.
Lol. Alexandre Meinesz.
JW, stop with the intellectual dishonesty. If you knew even the very basic fundamentals of evolution, you'd know that it's about species changing over time, not the origin of life. Thanks for proving yourself a liar and scientific illiterate. Your computer was created via science, maybe you should throw that away as well. I mean afterall, science is all just lies and deceptions, right? Why trust that computer?
Excellent proof of adaptation doG & Doc.
Christians cling to the abject foolishness of denying evolution because it proves their bible is a lie and their religion is a fraud. So they cling to the abject foolishness of denying evolution lest they have to face the fact that they are wrong. So it's sinful pride!
The REALLY funny thing is that evolution does NOT disprove creation...they are two seperate ideas.
Even the Pope in the eighties agreed that evolution is ongoing, but it doesn't change that god created life, with evolution as a mechanism to adapt to a changing world.
Was that supposed to be comprehensible?
Why is the "theory" of evolution important?
Because, it is a religion!
in what way is evolution a religion?
It is a belief system for which there is zero evidence. Your entire worldview ... practically everything you hold to in your life ... comes from this belief.
topher
That is just ignorance.
Evolution is not a belief system, and there is an overwhelming amount of evidence for it. We see it every day.
igaftr
"Evolution is not a belief system,"
You don't believe in it? It doesn't create your worldview?
"and there is an overwhelming amount of evidence for it. We see it every day."
Then you should have no problem proving it. Go ahead. You're about to be very rich and very famous.
igaftr: Topher doesn't grasp what a scientific theory is; if he did he wouldn't make such inept statements. It wouldn't matter how many times you explained the concept to him, as long as their is a religious block in him he'll deny it. I almost feel sorry for his unborn child but yet I know the child will be taught properly in the school system and eventually realize his/her parents have mislead him/her.
plenty of evidence for evolution???
Yes, in your imagination!
@CHRIS-topher: sooo how does it feel admitting you are imbred topher?
let's do a little math, shall we?
your parents are the only ONLY humans on earth, they give birth to you and your ilk; whom do you procreate with?
1) your mother.............GROSS.
2) your sisters.............EWWWWW.
so take your time to answer, i'm not in a hurry. XD
Evolution, is not a worldview, if it was overturned tomorrow I wouldn't lose any sleep. However it is the best explanation for the diversity of life that we see on the planet. If you disagree then quit complaining about it and start using science to overturn the theory. Coming on the internet everyday and claiming that Evolution is rejected by science only makes you look like an idiot.
topher
It has already been proven, thousands of times over.
Do you get a flu shot?...evolution at work.
Have you heard of drug resistant diseases?...evolution at work.
Gentetically modified food?...evolution at work.
I have no idea what more evidence you would accept, but the rest of the world is way past you.
truthprevails.
I know what you mean...topher trying to "teach" children reminds me of the Steve Martin bit where he teaches his child to talk wrong.
"May I mambo dog-face to the banana patch?"
WASP
Why do you say it's gross? If we're just chemicals reacting with other chemicals, then there's nothing wrong with it. Second, you can't say it's wrong because you don't have a higher standard. It's just your opinion against someone else's. It is only because God told us not to do that at some point that we know it is wrong. But you don't believe in God, so it's thus not wrong.
Topher,
No, evolution is not a worldview. It is a fact about the world. See Pete's response. Also, there are already scientists who have proven it. And yes, they are famous, though I doubt it made them rich.
@igaftr: "It has already been proven, thousands of times over. Do you get a flu shot?...evolution at work. Have you heard of drug resistant diseases?...evolution at work. Gentetically modified food?...evolution at work."
The mutation of viruses and bacteria is not evolution. Mutation does not lead to a general increase in the genetic information of the more complex specie (since we’re supposedly gradually progressing from a lower form to a more complex one). I should also point out that the scientific principles of natural selection and adaptation are not the same as evolution.
It takes faith to believe in evolution and that's why it's regarded as a religion.
Sure, it's just chemicals reacting with other chemicals. That's all inbreeding is.
You have a childish view of morality. Inbreeding is not "wrong" per se, but it is natural not to practice it because it leads to genetic defects, birth disorders, etc. We don't need a god to tell us not to do it. We have figured it out on our own. Just like we have figured it out on our own that murdering other people is anti social. We don't need a god for this either (as I've seen you claim before).
igaftr
"It has already been proven, thousands of times over."
Where?
"Do you get a flu shot?...evolution at work."
Nope. You want to claim resistance, but this is just natural selection at work.
"For example, to destroy a bacterium, the antibiotic streptomycin attaches to a part of the bacterial cell called ribosomes. Mutations sometimes cause a structural deformity in ribosomes. Since the antibiotic cannot connect with the misshapen ribosome, the bacterium is resistant. But even though this mutation turns out to be beneficial (for the moment), it still consti.tutes a loss of genetic information, not a gain. No ‘evolution’ has taken place: the bacteria are not ‘stronger.’ In fact, under normal conditions, with no antibiotic present, they are weaker than their nonmutated cousins.” — from Case Against Darwin, Chap. 2
"Gentetically modified food?...evolution at work."
If we alter it, then it's not natural. Second, you're still not going to get anything more than what is already in the genetics. Otherwise, "genetically modified food" would include ginormous cattle, hogs, corn ... to make farmers very rich and to solve world hunger. But you can't.
"Mutation does not lead to a general increase in the genetic information of the more complex specie (since we’re supposedly gradually progressing from a lower form to a more complex one)."
No, we are NOT supposedly gradually progressing from lower forms to more complex forms. The notion of a "Great Chain of Being" was discarded long ago. Evolution is not teleological.
"I should also point out that the scientific principles of natural selection and adaptation are not the same as evolution."
Natural selection is the primary mechanism by which evolution operates.
Topher
"you can't say it's wrong because you don't have a higher standard."
Atheists and agnostics often DO have higher standards. You don't see them on here praising a book that supports slavery and discrimination against women and gays and the handicapped. You don't see them praising a book that supports killing unruly children or killing people for disobeying by just turning around (see Lot's wife) as long as God does it.
The Bible is TOO IMMORAL for most atheists and agnostics.
Sungrazer: "No, we are NOT supposedly gradually progressing from lower forms to more complex forms. The notion of a "Great Chain of Being" was discarded long ago. Evolution is not teleological."
Someone needs to define for themselves and understand what theory it is that they're supporting.
(no need to reply... I'm done with this discussion).
Blessings.
"Second, you're still not going to get anything more than what is already in the genetics. Otherwise, "genetically modified food" would include ginormous cattle, hogs, corn ... to make farmers very rich and to solve world hunger. But you can't."
Dome some research on domesticated fruits and vegetables. Many have changed a lot from their wild origins, including increasing many times in size. And you want ginormous cattle? http://www.bestthinking.com/trendingtopics/science/is-there-a-place-for-genetically-modified-animals-in-your-future
Observer
"Atheists and agnostics often DO have higher standards."
Not higher than man's. They are still depending on their own opinions.
"You don't see them on here praising a book that supports slavery"
Fallacious argument.
"and discrimination against women"
Nope
"and gays and the handicapped."
Silliness.
"You don't see them praising a book that supports killing unruly children or killing people for disobeying by just turning around (see Lot's wife) as long as God does it."
You've clearly never read it.
"The Bible is TOO IMMORAL for most atheists and agnostics."
Ah, so once again, man claiming to be better than God. Ridiculous.
I'm fine with evolution because of all the evidence for it in thousands of research labs across the globe each and every day, but I certainly don't believe in Algebra or Chemistry. Just who are they trying to fool?!?!!?
The bible is the main reason I don't believe in the Christian version of god.
Topher,
Your IGNORANT remarks raise serious issues about whether you have ever READ a Bible.
IF YOU HAD READ ONE, you'd know it not only supports SLAVERY, it tells you it's okay to sell your daughter into slavery and tells WHERE you can BUY your slaves.
IF YOU HAD READ A BIBLE, you'd know that God doesn't want handicapped priests in his churches.
IF YOU HAD READ A BIBLE, you'd know that women are discriminated against and can't speak in church.
PLEASE read a Bible SOMEDAY so you won't look so CLUELESS.
JB
Quickly found a list of 115 books on evolution, many of them used as textbooks in schools and universities, all written within the last 200 years. Now your gang refutes all this knowledge with one book written 2000 years ago, at least the new part, and you are not even positive who the authors were. Willful ignorance.
"Ah, so once again, man claiming to be better than God. Ridiculous."
He is absolutely right. I am so, so much better than your god. I'll have Dawkins speak for me:
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, hom.ophobic, rac.ist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sad.omas.ochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
topher
"Nope. You want to claim resistance, but this is just natural selection at work."
You say nope, then cite a mechanism of evolution.
Do you even understand how evolution works?
Tropher, you are a liar. I'm sorry but there's no nice way to say it. Evolution is beyond confirmed, and you have NO EVIDENCE AGAINST IT, plus NO EVIDENCE for any other view. Stop spreading lies to promote your silly cult. What's next, you're going to say the earth is flat, or that it doesn't revolve around the sun? Genetic mutations = 100% proven to take place EVERY TIME genes are passed from parents to offspring. Natural selection = proven 100% via observation and common sense. If you want to talk science, then at least study the basics first. I wouldn't try to tell a nuclear physicist how to build a reactor core, because I don't know that field. Likewise, you shouldn't try to tell a biologist that all the work done by them in the past century is invalid, when you don't even know the basics. Sorry, but your posts are EPIC FAILS, and not one provides any evidence, they just make blanket statements that cannot be proven.
It's important to note that it's(evolutionism) a belief system, which is discussed on the "belief blog" more that it is in scientific blogs 😉
Scientists stick to science blogs; evolutionists stick to the belief blog.
I fail to see why you think that is important. Scientists know evolution is continually happening, so there is no debate.
it is only religious people that still reject the overwhelming proof of evolution. Since it is the religious that are continuing to try to teach their religion in public schools, it is the religious that need to be educated.
LOL, why would anyone in the scientific community debate the existence of evolution any more than doctors debate the effectiveness of antibiotics? Sure, in each group specialists debate details, but certain parts of these theories (yes, theories...there is nothing higher than a theory) are so well established that a new and astounding piece of evidence would be required to shake the foundations. Wow...we were deluded...antibiotics never really worked and it was all a placebo effect, with poorly designed double blind studies....aliens were influencing the results to make us think they worked...
So Cosine, were your parents trolls too, or did you devolve from humans?
Cosine: You clueless dolt, evolution is backed by numerous scientific facts...your denial of it only means you don't comprehend it. Take a science course and get back to us when you're educated enough to voice an opinion.
And yes, evolutionism is the only religion that can counter Christianity/Judaism, masquerading itself as science.
That is the only reason it is marketed so heavily without any evidence whatsoever.
Like you're marketing the Bible, Cosine?
Evolution isn't "marketed". How stupid.
cosine
"That is the only reason it is marketed so heavily without any evidence whatsoever."
If by "it" you mean religion, you are absolutley right.
without any evidence whatsoever.
----
LOL. Another day of fine comedy ahead of us, I see. Awesome, bring it.
Needless to say the followers of the religion are crude. Yikes!
Don't talk to yourself in the mirror. It's not normal.
because it makes god unnecessary.
AMEN!!!
Zing
Why is it important?
From the gooey stew through the zoo that ended up with you is a lovely fairy tale that every kid ought to learn and understand!
I don't "believe" in evolution, and if some other mechanism were found to be responsible for the diversity of the genome throughout the species, I would believe it rather than evolution-–but the data we KNOW would merely conform to that new description. I'd be excited about finding out about that new mechanism.
What sounds idiotic to me is claiming that some big invisible sky wizard chanted magic spells for six days to make a "perfect" world that was so fragile that one twist of one woman's wrist threw the entire thing into the sin/corruption of nuclear meltdown. LOLOLOLOL!!
🍝 ➛ 🐒 ➛ 👫
That's a good graphical representation!
Cool hieroglyphs!! Can you do one that shows a big invisible and undetectable wizard chanting a magic spell for six days and making people out of dirt and ribs and then the whole thing getting "diseased" when one of the people twists their wrist at 49 degrees because the invisible wizard made disease inevitable with such a slight action? That'd be coooooolll
Theta,
I think you are confused about what a theory is. What do you think is higher than being a theory?
Evolution is the glue that binds all of the different scientific fields of study together. Without it, modern science would not make sense at all.
It binds much of biology, psychology, anthropology and medicine, but I would't say it has much to say about astronomy or quantum theory. Even within a field like biology there are a few pockets that you could practice in without believing in evolution...though I would be very careful about hiring such an individual as these areas are so limited.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqHTCKlJpsY&feature=youtu.be
I love those videos... Thanks for posting!
This doesn't surprise me one bit, as you have already proven yourself to be a fan of complete nonsense.
I watched the fist 55 seconds. The producer states "the only way to properly view the fossil record is through the lens of somebody who has been there from the beginning, and that person is God.
In other words, presuppose the answer and then view all evidence with that conclusion already drawn. Couldn't stand to watch any more.
I am still convinced Australia and the Americas existed more than 4,000 years ago. lol
It's easy enough to figure out where to hide when the only logical fallacy you've got is "special pleading." When Christians try to be cute in videos like this one, it all goes there anyway, or the "might makes right with Yahweh" defense, or "goddidit with invisible magic" defense, or the "god works in myserious ways don't even try to figure it out" defense. Really, all of it's just special pleading. Boring.
you can refute a theory of evolution, like Darwin's theory, or Lamarck's theory, but you can't refute evolution because it's a fact. It is a directly observable fact. There may never be a theory that captures all the modes of evolution, but evolution is a fact.
Saying you refute evolution is like saying you refute gravity. The Newtonian theory was not completely right, the einstein theory is not completely right, but there is gravity.
– bostontola
The 5 laws of the Theory of Evolution have proven their validity thousands of times by millions of people.
The principles are practically applied on a daily basis in fields like medicine, geology, mathematics, molecular biology, robotics, chemistry, astrophysics, agriculture, epidemiology, aerospace engineering, architecture, data mining, drug discovery and design, electrical engineering, finance, geophysics, materials engineering, military strategy, pattern recognition, robotics, scheduling, systems engineering etc.
Tangible proof can be found by studying vestigial features, ebryonic development, biogeography, DNA sequencing, pseudogenes, endogenous retroviruses, labratory direct examination of natural selection in action in E-Coli bacteria, lactose intolerance in humans, the peppered moth's colour change in reaction to industrial pollution, radiotrophic fungi at Chernobyl... all of these things add to the modern evolutionary synthesis.
We have directly observes speciation in Blackcap birds, fruit flies, mosquitos, mice, Shortfin molly fish and other specimens.
Some of the methods used to determine the age of the planet include:
Stratigraphy, Dendrochronology,Obsidian Hydration Dating, Paleomagnetic/Archaeomagnetic , Luminescence Dating, Amino Acid Racemization, Fission-track Dating, Ice Cores, Cation Ratio, Fluorine Dating, Patination, oxidizable Carbon Ratio, Electron Spin Resonance , and Cosmic-ray Exposure Dating.
Evidence for the Genesis Creation account comes from The Bible and... nothing else, I'm afraid.
- Doc Vestibule
Evolution is taught in every major university and college biology program in the World. Not 99% of them, but EVERY one. Universities with extensive evolutionary biology departments include Oxford University, Cambridge University and the Imperial College in England, the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in Germany, the École Normale Supérieure and École Polythecnique in France and Leiden University in the Netherlands and the Swiss Federal Insti.tute of Technology in Switzerland. This is just a sample. ALL university and colleges in Europe teach evolution as a fundamental component of biology.
The number of universities and colleges in Europe with a creation science department: ZERO. The number of tenured or even paid professors who teach creation science at any of these universities or colleges: ZERO
In the United States, the following Universities have extensive evolutionary biology departments staffed by thousands of the most gifted biologists in the World; Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Colombia, Duke, the Massachusetts Insti.tute of Technology, Brown, Stanford, Berkley, and the University of Chicago. These are just some of the more prestigious examples. Again, ALL university and colleges in the USA with tertiary level biology classes teach evolution as a fundamental component of biology.
The number of universities and colleges in the United States with a creation science department: ZERO The number of tenured or even paid professors who teach creation science at any of these universities or colleges: ZERO
In Australia and Asia, the following universities and colleges have extensive evolutionary biology departments manned by more of the most gifted biological scientists in the World; Monash University in Melbourne, The University of New South Wales, Kyoto University in Ja.pan, Peking University in China, Seoul University in Korea, the University of Singapore, National Taiwan University, The Australian National University, The University of Melbourne, and the University of Sydney.
The number of universities and colleges in Australia and Asia with a creation science department: ZERO The number of tenured or even paid professors who teach creation science at any of these universities or colleges: ZERO
The most prestigious scientific publications in the Western World generally accessible to the public include: The Journal of the American Medical Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, Scientific American, Science, New Scientist, Cosmos and Live Science.
Every month, one or more of them publishes a peer reviewed article highlighting the latest developments in evolution. The amount of any creationist science articles published in ANY of these prestigious publications; ZERO.
I could repeat the above exercise for the following disciplines, all of which would have to be turned on their heads to accommodate creation science – paleontology, archeology, geology, botany, marine biology, astronomy, medicine, cosmology and historical linguistics.
There appears to be three possible explanations for this:
(i) there is a worldwide conspiracy of universities, colleges and academic publications, including all their tens of thousands of professors, editors, reviewers, and support staff, to deny creation science;
(ii) you, guyFromVA have a startling new piece of evidence that was right before our eyes that will turn accepted biological science and about 10 other sciences on their heads if ONLY people would listen to you, no doubt earning you a Nobel Prize and a place in history beside the likes of Darwin, Newton and Einstein; or
(iii) you are a complete blowhard who has never studied one subject of university level biology, never been on an archeological dig, never studied a thing about paleontology, geology, astronomy, linguistics or archeology, but feel perfectly sure that you know more than the best biologists, archeologists, paleontologists, doctors, astronomers botanists and linguists in the World because your mommy and daddy taught you some comforting stories from Bronze Age Palestine as a child.
I know which alternative my money is on.
- Colin