Originally posted by KellyJayBut the organs and dentition and metabolism required for eating meat are drastically different from predatory and no predatory land animals..... Thus the changes after the got off the ark would have to be very drastic. And furthermore they'd have to occour in a pretty short space of time to generate a new stable eco system. Meaning your "Vegan" Lions and panthers etc would have to undergo extremely rapid (single generation) evolution.
No I'm not suggesting that nore did I ever suggest that. I have
said that from the 'kinds' on the ark all the variety came to be, I have
said that before the flood land creature didn't eat meat. The eating
meat changed after the flood. Did they get new organs designed for
meat eating after the flood, I doubt it. I imagine the ones they had
did the work in my opinion.
Kelly
Aren't you the one that said before "Macro scale evolution doesn't happen" are you now refuting that by saying that Lions and Tigers went from Veganisim to predation in the space of a single generation?????????
Originally posted by KellyJaySo, are you saying that God, in his all knowing wisdom, created all currently meat eating animals in such a way that they would, in future be able to eat meat? In fact, for most carnivores, he designed them specifically for hunting and eating meat, implying that when designing them he actually had meat eating in mind. It is starting to sound very much like predestination. A wise man, before Noahs time, might have realized that a large number of animals were designed as carnivores and that he really had no choice but to commit whatever sins are required for Gods preplanned future.
No I'm not suggesting that nore did I ever suggest that. I have
said that from the 'kinds' on the ark all the variety came to be, I have
said that before the flood land creature didn't eat meat. The eating
meat changed after the flood. Did they get new organs designed for
meat eating after the flood, I doubt it. I imagine the ones they had
did the work in my opinion.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayYou need to learn how to write more clearly then. You emphatically stated that ALL animals did not eat meat.
I gave the scripture that I used for that view, had you read it you
would have seen it went just for the land creatures. I doubt you can
one way or another my intent or anything else.
Kelly
There are still two problems with your story, and I know from experience in being like you that it simply comes from not thinking things through.
First, it makes little theological sense (not that theology ever does make sense). If death or at least murder for food came as a consequence of man's rejection of Yahweh, then why would fish have been eating each other in the Garden? I am almost certain that you never thought they did. If one of your friends from church had asked you if fish ate each other in the Garden, you would have told him, "No. Animals did not eat each other in the Garden." It is only a spur of the moment convenience for you to distinguish between land and sea creatures. Presumably, this is because you foolishly believe that sea animals could survive a global flood.
Second, it matters little whether we talk about a sea creature or a terrestrial creature. The thought of a shark that does not eat meat is no less preposterous than that of a Tyrannosaurus Rex (a land animal) that does not eat meat. You never did answer my question on that. Did T-Rex survive the flood? Generally, if you look at any carnivore today, everything about them (not just their digestive organs) is specialized for killing and consuming other animals. Ironically, nobody except perhaps you and the most rabid Creationists thinks that they could have evolved into killing machines in such a short time. Then again if you change your story again and claim that nearly all of this physiology was already in place before the flood, then your argument is that a lion, pretty much in its current form, is actually a perfectly designed plant-eater! The same is true for a wolf or even a spider! Apparently all perfectly-designed plant eaters. The absurdity of that is probably lost on you, unfortunately.
Originally posted by MexicoI know you may think what he said is nonsense (I can understand that), but I think we can refrain from questioning each other's sanity or mental stability.
If you have, and you still don't think you've posted some utter nonsense, are you absolutely sure of your current mental stability and general sanity?
No matter what, we should keep the posts directed at the content and not the person.
I don't mean to pick on you, but still.
1 edit
Originally posted by PsychoPawnThe ability to argue with KellyJay without becoming personally is a feat of self-control that few here possess. Twhitehead and, the ever patient, vistesd come to mind. KJ basically invites it through his rudeness.
I know you may think what he said is nonsense (I can understand that), but I think we can refrain from questioning each other's sanity or mental stability.
No matter what, we should keep the posts directed at the content and not the person.
I don't mean to pick on you, but still.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI'm saying every creature on the land did not eat meat until after
So, are you saying that God, in his all knowing wisdom, created all currently meat eating animals in such a way that they would, in future be able to eat meat? In fact, for most carnivores, he designed them specifically for hunting and eating meat, implying that when designing them he actually had meat eating in mind. It is starting to sound very much lik ...[text shortened]... hat he really had no choice but to commit whatever sins are required for Gods preplanned future.
the flood, and it will return to that after Christ's return too, the lion
will lay down with the lamb, and the lamb will not be the meal when
that occurs.
Kelly
Originally posted by PsychoPawnYea this came mainly from the insults and rudeness he was tossing about in another thread, just got a little frustrated. Petty I know, but it's tough when someone refuses to even acknowledge your point and instead asks another inane question.
I know you may think what he said is nonsense (I can understand that), but I think we can refrain from questioning each other's sanity or mental stability.
No matter what, we should keep the posts directed at the content and not the person.
I don't mean to pick on you, but still.
As to the other bit I still think you should read some of your own postings........
1 edit
Originally posted by telerionWhy? Why will "you have something to say" regarding ANYONE's belief system? Poor KJ; I've seen him asked SO many dumb questions, and I'm sure he (like me) get tired of answering the same ol' tired questions all the time (How did T-Rex fit on the ark? Where did Cain get his wufe? Blah Blah Blah). If you REALLY "didn't care", you wouldn't have this obsession with debating him. Faith requires NO explanation or scientific basis. NONE. Ya got that? God-magic is suffivient. I believe it because a hummingbird told me...is sufficient. Evolution is just as much a religiuos leap of faith as Christianity is sufficient. Most important of all, most Christians don't give a damn about what you or anyone else is "gonna have to say" about our beliefs. Try to get some new material. We;ll talk later.
[b]No, I really don't care that much. But if you're going to try to justify your beliefs with anything other than god-magic, then I'm gonna have something to say.
Originally posted by MexicoI admit, I tend to get snippy myself.
Yea this came mainly from the insults and rudeness he was tossing about in another thread, just got a little frustrated. Petty I know, but it's tough when someone refuses to even acknowledge your point and instead asks another inane question.
As to the other bit I still think you should read some of your own postings........
I don't have a problem with people calling what people are saying stupid, just them I guess.
I admit I have gone over the line a couple times myself so I'll try to hold to that rule myself.
I do understand and sympathize with your frustration.
Originally posted by PinkFloydDon't you get what he's saying, if you all keep trying to justify, validate or otherwise explain their religious beliefs through science then those of us who have some knowledge, or in my case spent their life studying sciences are going to call you all up on it. If on the other hand your willing to admit that your belief is scientifically unsound then I personally, and I'm sure most of the others will happily leave you alone.
Why? Why will "you have something to say" regarding ANYONE's belief system? Poor KJ; I've seen him asked SO many dumb questions, and I'm sure he (like me) get tired of answering the same ol' tired questions all the time (How did T-Rex fit on the ark? Where did Cain get his wufe? Blah Blah Blah). If you REALLY "didn't care", you wouldn't have this obse ...[text shortened]... a have to say" about our beliefs. Try to get some new material. We;ll talk later.
The only other reason I debate these points is because people keep poking holes, and otherwise attacking the Theory of Evolution. Which by the way is Scientific FACT. If all the religious stopped attacking Evolution, then I'd probably stop posting here, until then I will continue to make points. What really irks me is that people keep attacking the facts behind evolution with half truths, pseudo-sciences and at times outright lies.......
Originally posted by PsychoPawnOh sorry not you.... That was aimed at KJ..... I haven't noticed anything about your posts.
I admit, I tend to get snippy myself.
I don't have a problem with people calling what people are saying stupid, just them I guess.
I admit I have gone over the line a couple times myself so I'll try to hold to that rule myself.
I do understand and sympathize with your frustration.
I was implying that he still needs to read some of what he's written.
3 edits
Originally posted by PinkFloydGo back to page 2 of this thread. Read my 2 short posts. Then come back and apologize to me. If you're going to step up and defend KJ, you should at least know what you're talking about.
Why? Why will "you have something to say" regarding ANYONE's belief system? Poor KJ; I've seen him asked SO many dumb questions, and I'm sure he (like me) get tired of answering the same ol' tired questions all the time (How did T-Rex fit on the ark? Where did Cain get his wufe? Blah Blah Blah). If you REALLY "didn't care", you wouldn't have this obse a have to say" about our beliefs. Try to get some new material. We;ll talk later.
Edit: If you choose not to read the few other posts that I've made in this thread, then Mexico's post above about leaving "Goddunnit" types alone has always been my position in this discussion.
Edit2: BTW I'm not concerned with how T-Rex got on the ark. KJ has said that it originally did not eat meat. I have asked only two easy questions about T-Rex. My first question was simply, "If not meat, what did T-Rex eat?" After all God must have perfectly designed T-Rex for non-meat consumption. Unless he's willing to admit macroevolution on a scale that no biologist would agree to, then KJ has to claim that T-Rex as we basically know it is pretty much perfectly designed for eating something other than animals. That seems pretty ridiculous. My other question is whether T-Rex died in the Flood or just shortly after. Many literalist Flood believers claim that this is the case. I have my own reasons for asking this question, and I will explain when (or better if) KJ ever gets around to answering it.
To the degree that I have seemed overly persistent in my endeavor to secure answers from KJ, it is completely due KJ obnoxious habit of making absurd claims and then dodging every hard question about it. Again if you take the brief time to review my posts in this thread you will find that I have always advised KJ to stick to "The Flood was a miracle of God. The Bible says it happened. I believe it." It's when he tries to justify it with some bit of science that I call BS.
Originally posted by KellyJayI got that, and understand it. Now, will you answer the questions?
I'm saying every creature on the land did not eat meat until after
the flood, and it will return to that after Christ's return too, the lion
will lay down with the lamb, and the lamb will not be the meal when
that occurs.
Kelly
In case you missed it they are as follows:
1. Since carnivores are clearly designed to be carnivores can we conclude that God - in his infinite wisdom - designed them as carnivores in Eden because he new that one day man would sin and the carnivores would be required to eat meat.
2. Can we make any conclusions about how such clever forethought on Gods part actually made it inevitable that man would sin?