You claim we can't see evolution happen. I provided you multiple documented examples of new species evolving from older species, across a wide variety of taxa, and in both wild and lab conditions.
River, how many times to tell you that what you have is only semantics?
To this day there is no clear, entirely established, unchanging definition of “species”.
So when you ask us YECs to prove evolution wrong, how exactly can we do that, since we, just like you, don’t even know what exactly the definition of “species” is?
And if you somehow believe that you have a clear definition of species, let me wake you up to reality:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species_problem
So, if even mainstream evolutionists admit there is
no clear definition for species, why exactly would you call that new Goatsbeard a new species? Just to play around with people here? Just to show something “in support” for your empty claim that you can see evolution happening right in front of your eyes?
In the end,
“A good way to start an argument among biologists is to ask them what seems a simple question: "What is a species?" http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/05/2/l_052_02.html
So why don’t you show me again evolution. Happening right now. Right in front of our eyes. After all, isn’t that what you claimed?
Your only response was to wave them all away with "that's not evolution".
Because, well… it isn’t.
You're not saying "you can't see evolution" because you think it hasn't happened, you're saying that because you believe it can't happen.
Doesn’t this look like: you see evolution happening because you believe it happens?
In your black/white world
Truly ironic. See above why.
if it turns out that evolution does happen, then you're only left with one choice....the Bible is 100% wrong, God doesn't exist, and you must become an atheist.
Indeed.
But I’m not so worried, because, well, evolution doesn’t happen.
See also further below, why to expect me to worry is false.
You're just not capable of anything else...anything in between the two extremes.
Indeed. And let me remind you that God Himself also isn’t capable of that. It’s not our way and God’s way, it’s only God’s way. So make sure you’re taking God’s way, instead of mankind’s ways. Because very soon there will be no human ways anymore.
So out of fear of that, you blankly deny anything and everything that might even hint at evolution being real.
Out of
fear that my God, the Biblical God, would be wrong?
Really? Well, let me tell you a couple of things:
1. unlike you, who wipe the floor with the Old Testament and are thoroughly convinced that you’ll go to Heaven, I’m not even sure that I’ll make it to Heaven; I certainly don’t deserve it;
2. let me assure you that I do
want to watch
all sorts of movies, read
all sorts of books, do
all sorts of other things, like ordinary people. And the only reason for
not doing all those things is one and one alone: the Biblical God.
Now you tell me the things you don’t do out of fear that evolution would be wrong…
As far as your quotes, would you like to examine them, one by one, and see if whatever source you've copied them from is telling you the whole story?
If by “the whole story” you mean that in the rest of the books, or articles, the authors argued for evolution (instead of against evolution), don’t bother - I already expect that. Aren’t they evolutionists, after all?
But that, however, doesn’t make what they said (what I quoted them to have said) less true.
As for the veracity of those quotes, yes I checked them personally myself. In other words I didn’t just take them from YEC sites and pasted them here. I checked the veracity either on google.books, or on mainstream sites (such as rationalwiki) with pages dedicated to what they call “quote mining”. So yes, I can affirm that indeed those fellows indeed said what I quoted them to say.
So let’s not lose time and instead talk about clear opposition between evolution and the Bible. I already showed you multiple such cases - feel free to talk about that.
Oh, and the Bible also claims uniformitarianism to be wrong. Not only in the general, by claiming the entire universe was affected by man’s sin, but also in particular, for example here: 2 Peter 3:3-4.
KJV:
“Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.”
Are you at all interested in seeing if maybe...just maybe...you're wrong?
See above.
When it says "And God said 'Let there be light'", that's not the same as "God directly made light", is it?
Actually, that’s exactly what it means: direct creation. By speech. Even the term “universe” means exactly that: a
unique spoken
verse from God.
Fiat lux. God’s fiat is indeed creation (creation out of nothing, which is the real creation). Unlike man’s fiat. Which is always an empty claim, instead of the real thing. Think about fiat money, for example. Lysander and I have talked about that somewhat.
In fact, pretty much everything in
Genesis 1 is God letting things happen.
Oh boy…
River, let’s try it the other way around: is there anything,
anything at all, in the Bible that you believe is true?
Literally true?
Because if we talk about interpretations, we could interpret things until Jesus comes, and that wouldn’t be fortunate for either of us, would it?
As for the rest of your comments in regard to Genesis, how about this: “after their kind”…
So no evolution. No matter how much you’d like it.
Not to mention that Jesus Himself said that God made them male and female:
Matthew 19:4, Mark 10:6.
So where exactly is the evolution?
And how could you have missed these Genesis verses: Genesis 1:27, Genesis 5:2 ?
Not to mention all the contradictions that you’re forced to postulate for the sole reason of somehow trying to make evolution fit the Bible…
Such as:
“I believe that when H. sapiens reached a stage of intelligence, conscience, and morality, that's when God "breathed life" into us. That's when we acquired souls.”
So previous “people”, or whatever you call them, weren’t actually alive? Interesting. Then how exactly did they manage to eventually produce what we call humans?
Interesting. Where does this idea come from?
I’m also interested in that answer, because that idea certainly doesn’t come from the Bible.
According to the Bible, plants are not even alive, let alone having a soul. The Bible says that life is in the blood.
The Bible doesn’t use the term “live” in relation to plants, but instead it says that plants "grow" or "flourish”.
And the Bible doesn’t use the term “die” in relation to plants, but instead it says that plants “wither" or "fade”.
This again makes a clear separation between the Bible and evolution. I find that remarkable: that no matter what we’re discussing, evolution claims an opposed view to the Bible.
And here are some other problems that Christian evolutionists (or Christian big bangers, in case of Ross) must face:
http://creation.com/the-fall-a-cosmic-catastrophe
And trust me, those are not all…
As for animals having souls, I couldn’t find Scriptural support for that, but I find interesting that 2 evolutionists contradict each other in regard to fitting evolution into the Bible. As for me, well, I think it’s the most impossible task in the world, so if I were you I wouldn’t bother. But I know you won’t drop evolution, so I guess you’re left with just that: the most impossible task in the world…
And, River, one more time:
- whose world is this? one or two words, please;
- do you believe in the Bible? yes or no, please.
