What's wrong with evolution?

Originally posted by dj2becker
A few lines back you said it does. Make up your mind.

I'm willing to bet that in fact scott didn't say that and you just can't read. That's always been the case in the past hasn't it dj?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I have told you many times about the evidence. Evidence. That's why it's no assumption.

What about the evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? You reject history of 2000 years ago, but now you are saying that you know what the earth was like 3 billion + years ago????

You are a waste of time.

So long.

Originally posted by dj2becker
What about the evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? You reject history of 2000 years ago, but now you are saying that you know what the earth was like 3 billion + years ago????

You are a waste of time.

So long.

The evidence for Jesus rising from the dead is not very conclusive. 2000 year old recorded history, is known to be frequently inaccurate as is 100 year old and 10 year old recorded history. Scientific dating methods when used properly have been shown to be considerably more accurate.
There is also the matter of quantity of evidence. The amount of evidence for Jesus rising from the dead is minuscule compared to the amount of evidence for evolution. In fact the evidence that human beings cannot rise from the dead is significantly large.

Originally posted by dj2becker
What about the evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? You reject history of 2000 years ago, but now you are saying that you know what the earth was like 3 billion + years ago????

You are a waste of time.

So long.

Provide the evidence. The Bible is not evidence.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Provide the evidence. The Bible is not evidence.

Let me play this game your way:

You are wrong. And you will always be as long as you reject the Bible.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Let me play this game your way:

You are wrong. And you will always be as long as you reject the Bible.

Despite the fact that all the evidence says that the Bible is wrong? Oh dear dj, I think you are confused about right and wrong.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
Despite the fact that all the evidence says that the Bible is wrong? Oh dear dj, I think you are confused about right and wrong.

Which evidence would that be?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Which evidence would that be?

You know the bit where the Bible says the Earth is 6000 years old? The evidence says otherwise.
What about the bit where the Bible says the Earth was covered in water by a vengeful God? The evidence says otherwise.
Or the bit where some crazy hippy guy performed all those wacky miracles. The evidence says that miracles (loaves and fishes, coin from behind the ear, water to wine) aren't possible.

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
You know the bit where the Bible says the Earth is 6000 years old? The evidence says otherwise.
What about the bit where the Bible says the Earth was covered in water by a vengeful God? The evidence says otherwise.
Or the bit where some crazy hippy guy performed all those wacky miracles. The evidence says that miracles (loaves and fishes, coin from behind the ear, water to wine) aren't possible.

You know the bit where the Bible says the Earth is 6000 years old?

Chapter and verse please.

What about the bit where the Bible says the Earth was covered in water by a vengeful God? The evidence says otherwise.

Oh you mean the fossil record? But I thought it shows rapid burial of plants and animals?

Or the bit where some crazy hippy guy performed all those wacky miracles. The evidence says that miracles (loaves and fishes, coin from behind the ear, water to wine) aren't possible.

Ever read anything in history given by eyewitness accounts?

Originally posted by dj2becker
[b]You know the bit where the Bible says the Earth is 6000 years old?

Chapter and verse please.

What about the bit where the Bible says the Earth was covered in water by a vengeful God? The evidence says otherwise.

Oh you mean the fossil record? But I thought it shows rapid burial of plants and animals?

Or the bit where some crazy ...[text shortened]... er to wine) aren't possible.

Ever read anything in history given by eyewitness accounts?[/b]

Chapter and verse please.
You truely are the master of mental gymnastics dj. In the past you've used the Bible as evidence of a 6,000 year old Earth and now you are claiming it doesn't say it?

Oh you mean the fossil record? But I thought it shows rapid burial of plants and animals?
The fossil record for one. The shortage of water for another. The lack of the signs of such flooding, the fact that all those animals couldn't get on a boat (a boat bigger than any other wooden boat ever constructed), the list goes on.

Ever read anything in history given by eyewitness accounts?
Provide a physical method for turning water into wine.

Originally posted by dj2becker
What about the evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? You reject history of 2000 years ago, but now you are saying that you know what the earth was like 3 billion + years ago????

You are a waste of time.

So long.

Given that only some of the gospels actually record this event and they were written after his death I'm willing to bet that they are not accurate accounts of actual events. So, in the absence of any other compelling proof we can assume that this never happened.

Imagine for a moment if you will ...
You are a disciple of this cool guy who was, you think, murdered for saying it'd be great if everyone was nice to everyone else. You're keen to get others on board.
Why not fudge the story a bit, and make him not only cool or nice but magical as well.
He rose from the dead, man!
A fisherman's tale gone mad.

I can understand that.
It makes a whole lot more sense that the alternative.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
You are making the assumption that humans HAD to happen. Where is your evidence for that? I don't think we did have to happen. It's just a lucky co-incidence for us that we did!

My point is that there are humans, "had' requires a plan and a
purpose, and a design. You start all your assumptions with that
point removed from the picture, and belittle those that look at
the same pieces of evidence you have, and come with different
reasons for the life we see today. You again as I have pointed
out to you before, seek to prove your beliefs are correct. You
accused me of doing what everyone does, and you deny that you
too are just as guilty as everyone else.
Kelly

Originally posted by dj2becker
What about the evidence that Jesus rose from the dead? You reject history of 2000 years ago, but now you are saying that you know what the earth was like 3 billion + years ago????

You are a waste of time.

So long.

Anyone could have written that down. No-one can falsify the chemical composition of rocks however.

I may be a waste of time, but you are a waste of perfectly good human skin.

Originally posted by KellyJay
My point is that there are humans, "had' requires a plan and a
purpose, and a design. You start all your assumptions with that
point removed from the picture, and belittle those that look at
the same pieces of evidence you have, and come with different
reasons for the life we see today. You again as I have pointed
out to you before, seek to prove your ...[text shortened]... ing what everyone does, and you deny that you
too are just as guilty as everyone else.
Kelly

But you are still making the assumption that humans HAD to happen.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
But you are still making the assumption that humans HAD to happen.

I don't have a problem saying that humans had to happen since I
believe they were created as humans from the get go, millions of
years not required. You have a point there? You are of the opinion
that they didn't have to happen, we were just lucky or something that
we did occur?
Kelly