Creationists

[LittleNipper]

As usual, you miss the point. The Constitution embraces the free will teachings of the Christian religion and also reflects the Pilgrims initial reason for fleeing England, so that the government could not have an official Church. This doesn't change the fact the nation was found by Christian men, on Christian principles, for a largely Christian populace. And as long as the websites like the Library of Congress and the National Archives don't succumb to the rabid revisionism that you continually preach, any one who searches will still be able to find the truth. My fear is that the actual documents will be lost, and eventually the bits and bytes will be corrupted, and evil people like you Hawly will have their way at erasing what really happened, to serve their own miserable, self-loathing, Christ-hating agendas. People like you are dangerous like Hitler was, because evil and violence against a certain group is your goal. Just one of the tools of your hate and bigotry is revisionism. The other is repeating lies over and over enough that you first believe the lie yourself and then you convince other weak-minded and impressionable people like NP and Daws to believe your lies.

Violence? Really?

I see christianity as a myth. A fraud. A means of control. I grew up in it. Know the book cover to cover and think Jesus teachings, while good, are among the most ignored in the whole bible.

I see christians as judgmental, hateful, spiteful people who bath in ignorance.

But violence? Come on...

Jesus spoke of these which you describe providing strength to his words.

Is this not what we see of many so called Christians leaders of the poast and presence ?

Mat 23:13 But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of Heaven against men. For you neither go in, nor do you allow those entering to go in.
Mat 23:14 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows' houses, and pray at length as a pretense. Therefore you shall receive the greater condemnation.
Mat 23:15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you compass sea and the dry land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Mat 23:16 Woe to you, blind guides, saying, Whoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor.
Mat 23:17 Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold?
Mat 23:18 And, Whoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on it, he is a debtor!
Mat 23:19 Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifies the gift?
Mat 23:20 Therefore whoever shall swear by the altar swears by it, and by all things on it.
Mat 23:21 And whoever shall swear by the temple, swears by it and by Him who dwells in it.
Mat 23:22 And he who shall swear by Heaven swears by the throne of God, and by Him who sits on it.
Mat 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and you have left undone the weightier matters of the Law, judgment, mercy, and faith. You ought to have done these and not to leave the other undone.
Mat 23:24 Blind guides who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!
Mat 23:25 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of extortion and excess.
Mat 23:26 Blind Pharisee! First cleanse the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of them may be clean also.
Mat 23:27 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which indeed appear beautiful outside, but inside they are full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so you also appear righteous to men outwardly, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Mat 23:29 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets, and decorate the tombs of the righteous,
Mat 23:30 and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Mat 23:31 Therefore you are witnesses to yourselves, that you are the sons of those who killed the prophets;
Mat 23:32 and you fill up the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 Serpents! Offspring of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Therefore, behold, I send prophets and wise men and scribes to you. And you will kill and crucify some of them. And some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city;
Mat 23:35 so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Berachiah, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Truly I say to you, All these things shall come on this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left to you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say to you, You shall not see Me from now on until you say, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord."

Mat 15:7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
Mat 15:8 "This people draws near to Me with their mouth, and honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."


Mat 6:5 And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, They have their reward.
Mat 6:6 But you, when you pray, enter into your room. And shutting your door, pray to your Father in secret; and your Father who sees in secret shall reward you openly.

Hypocrites and blind guides are gonna pay a price and have brought disrespect to the true God but cannot allow these to mislead them.

Actually, Our Lord was speaking of the educators of his day. Today, He would be speaking of the Evolutionist and the Democtatic liberal socialist reformer.

Proof of God: Hundreds injured as meteor fireball screams across the sky in Russia - Cosmic Log

 

[LittleNipper]

Proof of God: Hundreds injured as meteor fireball screams across the sky in Russia - Cosmic Log

 

[Hollie]

Proof of God: Hundreds injured as meteor fireball screams across the sky in Russia - Cosmic Log

I thought meteors were missiles against jinn?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

 

[LittleNipper]

Proof of God: Hundreds injured as meteor fireball screams across the sky in Russia - Cosmic Log

I thought meteors were missiles against jinn?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

The only gawds are those worshipped iin place of the GOD. The remarkable thing is had that meteor made a direct hit, many lives would have been lost. As it is, there was some noise, broken glass and a few bandaids. It is a miracle. Another proof of GOD's abilities.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I think the religion of the founders is nothing like that of modern christians. Perhaps there were those people around in their day. But these men were often men of education. Some even men of science, limited as it was in that day.

They didn't use the government models of imposing a godly king. (Washington would have been the ideal choice.) Instead they looked to the heathen Greeks and early Romans for inspiration. These were not fundamentalist who believed man inherently evil. They believed that mankind could make the right decisions if only they were educated (a truly liberal and humanist position if ever there was one).

So they may have believed in a god. But I've seen nothing in my extensive reading to suggest they were anything like the christians of today.

So are you suggesting creationist today are not men of science ?

Of course many aren't. But I'm suggesting a bit more than that. I think at least some of the founders were intellectuals first and held religion as a cultural nicety.

I spent a lot of time reading the writings of Jefferson and Franklin. Both rarely talked about god as anything more than a curiosity.

So I suspect they (and probably others) were christians as many people today are christians. They played the game, talked the talk as needed, but really didn't bother with it all that much.

This is why I don't buy the premise that they were a "godly bunch of men" in the strictest sense. Even Adams didn't really focus much on religion until later in life.

The forefathers had a plan and an effective plan for man to be free and proud,a people that would overcome oppression and be free to believe as they choose. Many of these forefathers were influenced by what is taught in the scriptures and possessed Christian view and values. Unfortunately because of the ones that did not heed the Teachings of Christ their actions are being used again'st Gods true followers.

God told us what to look for and how to Identify his people and how to know who are not his people. It's the works these people do in front of others. He started with the Pharisee's and saducee's but you can see these same hypocrites and blind guides at work in our society today. Jesus refers to them as being from their father the father of lies and Identifies him by the name of satan. Some Christians don't even realize that is who they are representing.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I think the religion of the founders is nothing like that of modern christians. Perhaps there were those people around in their day. But these men were often men of education. Some even men of science, limited as it was in that day.

They didn't use the government models of imposing a godly king. (Washington would have been the ideal choice.) Instead they looked to the heathen Greeks and early Romans for inspiration. These were not fundamentalist who believed man inherently evil. They believed that mankind could make the right decisions if only they were educated (a truly liberal and humanist position if ever there was one).

So they may have believed in a god. But I've seen nothing in my extensive reading to suggest they were anything like the christians of today.

So are you suggesting creationist today are not men of science ?

no that's not what Underhill was saying.. Underhill was however pointing out the huge differences between you bigoted, bible thumping, ignorant propagandists and the founding fathers.
to answer your provocation, no creationists are not men or women of science.

Take a close look at yourself and your posts you could be the real propagandists. Showing your hatred for people who merely believe in a higher power where does the hatred and contempt come from daws ? What have believers done to you for you to feel this way about them ? You are wrong there are many of us educated in the sciences and believe in the creator and creation.

 

[Youwerecreated]

another ignorant post by ywc

Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab
22:00 09 June 2008 by Bob Holmes
For similar stories, visit the Evolution Topic Guide




A major evolutionary innovation has unfurled right in front of researchers' eyes. It's the first time evolution has been caught in the act of making such a rare and complex new trait.

And because the species in question is a bacterium, scientists have been able to replay history to show how this evolutionary novelty grew from the accumulation of unpredictable, chance events.

Twenty years ago, evolutionary biologist Richard Lenski of Michigan State University in East Lansing, US, took a single Escherichia coli bacterium and used its descendants to found 12 laboratory populations.

The 12 have been growing ever since, gradually accumulating mutations and evolving for more than 44,000 generations, while Lenski watches what happens.

Profound change

Mostly, the patterns Lenski saw were similar in each separate population. All 12 evolved larger cells, for example, as well as faster growth rates on the glucose they were fed, and lower peak population densities.

But sometime around the 31,500th generation, something dramatic happened in just one of the populations - the bacteria suddenly acquired the ability to metabolise citrate, a second nutrient in their culture medium that E. coli normally cannot use.

Indeed, the inability to use citrate is one of the traits by which bacteriologists distinguish E. coli from other species. The citrate-using mutants increased in population size and diversity.

"It's the most profound change we have seen during the experiment. This was clearly something quite different for them, and it's outside what was normally considered the bounds of E. coli as a species, which makes it especially interesting," says Lenski.

Rare mutation?

By this time, Lenski calculated, enough bacterial cells had lived and died that all simple mutations must already have occurred several times over.

That meant the "citrate-plus" trait must have been something special - either it was a single mutation of an unusually improbable sort, a rare chromosome inversion, say, or else gaining the ability to use citrate required the accumulation of several mutations in sequence.

To find out which, Lenski turned to his freezer, where he had saved samples of each population every 500 generations. These allowed him to replay history from any starting point he chose, by reviving the bacteria and letting evolution "replay" again.

Would the same population evolve Cit+ again, he wondered, or would any of the 12 be equally likely to hit the jackpot?

Evidence of evolution

The replays showed that even when he looked at trillions of cells, only the original population re-evolved Cit+ - and only when he started the replay from generation 20,000 or greater. Something, he concluded, must have happened around generation 20,000 that laid the groundwork for Cit+ to later evolve.

Lenski and his colleagues are now working to identify just what that earlier change was, and how it made the Cit+ mutation possible more than 10,000 generations later.

In the meantime, the experiment stands as proof that evolution does not always lead to the best possible outcome. Instead, a chance event can sometimes open evolutionary doors for one population that remain forever closed to other populations with different histories.

Lenski's experiment is also yet another poke in the eye for anti-evolutionists, notes Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Chicago. "The thing I like most is it says you can get these complex traits evolving by a combination of unlikely events," he says. "That's just what creationists say can't happen."

Journal reference: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0803151105)Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab - life - 09 June 2008 - New Scientist

bacterium evolve into better bacteria... just as humans are a better form of ape.

Hello Daws you have yet to understand the difference between microadaptations and macro-evolution I even made my point clear by saying a "non-bacterium".


You really don't understand your own theory now do you. If humans are just a better form of the ape what did the ape come from ?

really slapdick? what you fail epically and constantly to understand is your false comparisons are meaningless so instead of answering that inane question,"Now if they could only demonstrate that a bacterium could evolve in to something other then a bacterium"- ywc (btw other than is not the same as non! ) I presented actually proof that bacteria do evolve.

also micro adaptations and macro-evolution are bullshit creationist pseudoscience AND are not actual scientific terms .
apes and men had a common ancestor that's WHERE.

I am asking you what did humans evolve from ? what did apes evolve from ? What did the common ancestor evolve from ?

Those terms were actually coined by evolutionist please don't force me to continue repeating myself.

From one of your favorite sites.

"Antievolutionists argue against macroevolution so loudly that some people think they invented the term in order to dismiss evolution. But this is not true; scientists not only use the terms, they have an elaborate set of models and ideas about it, which of course antievolutionists gloss over or treat as being somehow problems for evolutionary biology."

Macroevolution: Its definition, Philosophy and History

What they don't share with their readers there is much debate on what constitutes a completely new species.

Sure you have different kinds within a species but that hardly constitutes macroevolution or speciation. We want to know how a Microbe winds up a Microbiologist. They extrapolate from microadaptations to suggest macroevolution but this is what they can't demonstrate that an accumulation of microadaptations leads to a microbe evolving all the way to the Microbiololgist.

 

[Hollie]

Hello Daws you have yet to understand the difference between microadaptations and macro-evolution I even made my point clear by saying a "non-bacterium".


You really don't understand your own theory now do you. If humans are just a better form of the ape what did the ape come from ?

really slapdick? what you fail epically and constantly to understand is your false comparisons are meaningless so instead of answering that inane question,"Now if they could only demonstrate that a bacterium could evolve in to something other then a bacterium"- ywc (btw other than is not the same as non! ) I presented actually proof that bacteria do evolve.

also micro adaptations and macro-evolution are bullshit creationist pseudoscience AND are not actual scientific terms .
apes and men had a common ancestor that's WHERE.

I am asking you what did humans evolve from ? what did apes evolve from ? What did the common ancestor evolve from ?

Those terms were actually coined by evolutionist please don't force me to continue repeating myself.

From one of your favorite sites.

"Antievolutionists argue against macroevolution so loudly that some people think they invented the term in order to dismiss evolution. But this is not true; scientists not only use the terms, they have an elaborate set of models and ideas about it, which of course antievolutionists gloss over or treat as being somehow problems for evolutionary biology."

Macroevolution: Its definition, Philosophy and History

What they don't share with their readers there is much debate on what constitutes a completely new species.

Sure you have different kinds within a species but that hardly constitutes macroevolution or speciation. We want to know how a Microbe winds up a Microbiologist. They extrapolate from microadaptations to suggest macroevolution but this is what they can't demonstrate that an accumulation of microadaptations leads to a microbe evolving all the way to the Microbiololgist.

Your confusion and ignorance deries from not reading the link you posted.

Speciation has been observed. This has been explained to you and other creationist multiple times.

Are you dense?

 

[Hollie]

Proof of God: Hundreds injured as meteor fireball screams across the sky in Russia - Cosmic Log

I thought meteors were missiles against jinn?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

The only gawds are those worshipped iin place of the GOD. The remarkable thing is had that meteor made a direct hit, many lives would have been lost. As it is, there was some noise, broken glass and a few bandaids. It is a miracle. Another proof of GOD's abilities.

How do you know if the gawds had intended to wipe out a bunch of humanity but missed?

 

[LittleNipper]

I thought meteors were missiles against jinn?

Those gawds, they're such kidders.

The only gawds are those worshipped iin place of the GOD. The remarkable thing is had that meteor made a direct hit, many lives would have been lost. As it is, there was some noise, broken glass and a few bandaids. It is a miracle. Another proof of GOD's abilities.

How do you know if the gawds had intended to wipe out a bunch of humanity but missed?

The one true GOD never missed in the Bible. Funny that the scientists you trust were caught by surprise...

 

[LittleNipper]

really slapdick? what you fail epically and constantly to understand is your false comparisons are meaningless so instead of answering that inane question,"Now if they could only demonstrate that a bacterium could evolve in to something other then a bacterium"- ywc (btw other than is not the same as non! ) I presented actually proof that bacteria do evolve.

also micro adaptations and macro-evolution are bullshit creationist pseudoscience AND are not actual scientific terms .
apes and men had a common ancestor that's WHERE.

I am asking you what did humans evolve from ? what did apes evolve from ? What did the common ancestor evolve from ?

Those terms were actually coined by evolutionist please don't force me to continue repeating myself.

From one of your favorite sites.

"Antievolutionists argue against macroevolution so loudly that some people think they invented the term in order to dismiss evolution. But this is not true; scientists not only use the terms, they have an elaborate set of models and ideas about it, which of course antievolutionists gloss over or treat as being somehow problems for evolutionary biology."

Macroevolution: Its definition, Philosophy and History

What they don't share with their readers there is much debate on what constitutes a completely new species.

Sure you have different kinds within a species but that hardly constitutes macroevolution or speciation. We want to know how a Microbe winds up a Microbiologist. They extrapolate from microadaptations to suggest macroevolution but this is what they can't demonstrate that an accumulation of microadaptations leads to a microbe evolving all the way to the Microbiololgist.

Your confusion and ignorance deries from not reading the link you posted.

Speciation has been observed. This has been explained to you and other creationist multiple times.

Are you dense?

Ok, so a Orthodontist is specialized in his field. However, specialized, he is no less human. He might be taller, stronger, wiser, handsomer, but he still is very human ---- with some extra ability.

 

[Hollie]

I am asking you what did humans evolve from ? what did apes evolve from ? What did the common ancestor evolve from ?

Those terms were actually coined by evolutionist please don't force me to continue repeating myself.

From one of your favorite sites.

"Antievolutionists argue against macroevolution so loudly that some people think they invented the term in order to dismiss evolution. But this is not true; scientists not only use the terms, they have an elaborate set of models and ideas about it, which of course antievolutionists gloss over or treat as being somehow problems for evolutionary biology."

Macroevolution: Its definition, Philosophy and History

What they don't share with their readers there is much debate on what constitutes a completely new species.

Sure you have different kinds within a species but that hardly constitutes macroevolution or speciation. We want to know how a Microbe winds up a Microbiologist. They extrapolate from microadaptations to suggest macroevolution but this is what they can't demonstrate that an accumulation of microadaptations leads to a microbe evolving all the way to the Microbiololgist.

Your confusion and ignorance deries from not reading the link you posted.

Speciation has been observed. This has been explained to you and other creationist multiple times.

Are you dense?

Ok, so a Orthodontist is specialized in his field. However, specialized, he is no less human. He might be taller, stronger, wiser, handsomer, but he still is very human ---- with some extra ability.

Speciation.

Good gawds, man.

Speciation.

 

[Hollie]

The only gawds are those worshipped iin place of the GOD. The remarkable thing is had that meteor made a direct hit, many lives would have been lost. As it is, there was some noise, broken glass and a few bandaids. It is a miracle. Another proof of GOD's abilities.

How do you know if the gawds had intended to wipe out a bunch of humanity but missed?

The one true GOD never missed in the Bible. Funny that the scientists you trust were caught by surprise...

You have no way of knowing if any of the gawds missed or not.

 

[ima]

So after the flood, how did all the animals get back to Australia, Hawaii and other far off places from where the boat landed?

 

[LittleNipper]

So after the Flood, how did all the animals get back to Australia, Hawaii and other far off places from where the boat landed?

After the actual Flood came an Ice Age. This caused ocean depths to drop. Likely such animals lived elsewhere originally and migrated to places prone to support their kind in the brave new Post Flood environment. Scientists say a land bridge once connected Asia to North America. So, there were likely others.

 

[daws101]

So are you suggesting creationist today are not men of science ?

no that's not what Underhill was saying.. Underhill was however pointing out the huge differences between you bigoted, bible thumping, ignorant propagandists and the founding fathers.
to answer your provocation, no creationists are not men or women of science.

Take a close look at yourself and your posts you could be the real propagandists. Showing your hatred for people who merely believe in a higher power where does the hatred and contempt come from daws ? What have believers done to you for you to feel this way about them ? You are wrong there are many of us educated in the sciences and believe in the creator and creation.

lol ... the basis of your whole belief system is if you don't do as we tell you to do then you are going to hell...please not shit about free choice

if that's not propaganda and hubris .then there is none .

 

[daws101]

Hello Daws you have yet to understand the difference between microadaptations and macro-evolution I even made my point clear by saying a "non-bacterium".


You really don't understand your own theory now do you. If humans are just a better form of the ape what did the ape come from ?

really slapdick? what you fail epically and constantly to understand is your false comparisons are meaningless so instead of answering that inane question,"Now if they could only demonstrate that a bacterium could evolve in to something other then a bacterium"- ywc (btw other than is not the same as non! ) I presented actually proof that bacteria do evolve.

also micro adaptations and macro-evolution are bullshit creationist pseudoscience AND are not actual scientific terms .
apes and men had a common ancestor that's WHERE.

I am asking you what did humans evolve from ? what did apes evolve from ? What did the common ancestor evolve from ?

Those terms were actually coined by evolutionist please don't force me to continue repeating myself.

From one of your favorite sites.

"Antievolutionists argue against macroevolution so loudly that some people think they invented the term in order to dismiss evolution. But this is not true; scientists not only use the terms, they have an elaborate set of models and ideas about it, which of course antievolutionists gloss over or treat as being somehow problems for evolutionary biology."

Macroevolution: Its definition, Philosophy and History

What they don't share with their readers there is much debate on what constitutes a completely new species.

Sure you have different kinds within a species but that hardly constitutes macroevolution or speciation. We want to know how a Microbe winds up a Microbiologist. They extrapolate from microadaptations to suggest macroevolution but this is what they can't demonstrate that an accumulation of microadaptations leads to a microbe evolving all the way to the Microbiololgist.

how the fuck is we? if you are not a paid or recognized representative of this imaginary WE then speak for yourself only...almost forgot your oft repeated "question" has been asked and answered .....you like all slapdicks DON'T LIKE THE ANSWER...
OH YEAH, this meteor strike kinda blows the shit out of your closed system nonsense.

 

[daws101]

Violence? Really?

I see christianity as a myth. A fraud. A means of control. I grew up in it. Know the book cover to cover and think Jesus teachings, while good, are among the most ignored in the whole bible.

I see christians as judgmental, hateful, spiteful people who bath in ignorance.

But violence? Come on...

Jesus spoke of these which you describe providing strength to his words.

Is this not what we see of many so called Christians leaders of the poast and presence ?

Mat 23:13 But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of Heaven against men. For you neither go in, nor do you allow those entering to go in.
Mat 23:14 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows' houses, and pray at length as a pretense. Therefore you shall receive the greater condemnation.
Mat 23:15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you compass sea and the dry land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
Mat 23:16 Woe to you, blind guides, saying, Whoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor.
Mat 23:17 Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold?
Mat 23:18 And, Whoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on it, he is a debtor!
Mat 23:19 Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifies the gift?
Mat 23:20 Therefore whoever shall swear by the altar swears by it, and by all things on it.
Mat 23:21 And whoever shall swear by the temple, swears by it and by Him who dwells in it.
Mat 23:22 And he who shall swear by Heaven swears by the throne of God, and by Him who sits on it.
Mat 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithes of mint and dill and cummin, and you have left undone the weightier matters of the Law, judgment, mercy, and faith. You ought to have done these and not to leave the other undone.
Mat 23:24 Blind guides who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!
Mat 23:25 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of extortion and excess.
Mat 23:26 Blind Pharisee! First cleanse the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of them may be clean also.
Mat 23:27 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which indeed appear beautiful outside, but inside they are full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so you also appear righteous to men outwardly, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Mat 23:29 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets, and decorate the tombs of the righteous,
Mat 23:30 and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
Mat 23:31 Therefore you are witnesses to yourselves, that you are the sons of those who killed the prophets;
Mat 23:32 and you fill up the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 Serpents! Offspring of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Therefore, behold, I send prophets and wise men and scribes to you. And you will kill and crucify some of them. And some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city;
Mat 23:35 so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Berachiah, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Truly I say to you, All these things shall come on this generation.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to her, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left to you desolate.
Mat 23:39 For I say to you, You shall not see Me from now on until you say, "Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord."

Mat 15:7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying,
Mat 15:8 "This people draws near to Me with their mouth, and honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.
Mat 15:9 But in vain they worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."


Mat 6:5 And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, They have their reward.
Mat 6:6 But you, when you pray, enter into your room. And shutting your door, pray to your Father in secret; and your Father who sees in secret shall reward you openly.

Hypocrites and blind guides are gonna pay a price and have brought disrespect to the true God but cannot allow these to mislead them.

Actually, Our Lord was speaking of the educators of his day. Today, He would be speaking of the Evolutionist and the Democtatic liberal socialist reformer.

Proof of God: Hundreds injured as meteor fireball screams across the sky in Russia - Cosmic Log

sorry but you're wrong it proves that interstellar objects do from time to time hit the earth.
it's no proof god did it.
were those Russians sinners targeted by god?
or does god have really shitty aim?

 

[Youwerecreated]

really slapdick? what you fail epically and constantly to understand is your false comparisons are meaningless so instead of answering that inane question,"Now if they could only demonstrate that a bacterium could evolve in to something other then a bacterium"- ywc (btw other than is not the same as non! ) I presented actually proof that bacteria do evolve.

also micro adaptations and macro-evolution are bullshit creationist pseudoscience AND are not actual scientific terms .
apes and men had a common ancestor that's WHERE.

I am asking you what did humans evolve from ? what did apes evolve from ? What did the common ancestor evolve from ?

Those terms were actually coined by evolutionist please don't force me to continue repeating myself.

From one of your favorite sites.

"Antievolutionists argue against macroevolution so loudly that some people think they invented the term in order to dismiss evolution. But this is not true; scientists not only use the terms, they have an elaborate set of models and ideas about it, which of course antievolutionists gloss over or treat as being somehow problems for evolutionary biology."

Macroevolution: Its definition, Philosophy and History

What they don't share with their readers there is much debate on what constitutes a completely new species.

Sure you have different kinds within a species but that hardly constitutes macroevolution or speciation. We want to know how a Microbe winds up a Microbiologist. They extrapolate from microadaptations to suggest macroevolution but this is what they can't demonstrate that an accumulation of microadaptations leads to a microbe evolving all the way to the Microbiololgist.

Your confusion and ignorance deries from not reading the link you posted.

Speciation has been observed. This has been explained to you and other creationist multiple times.

Are you dense?

Your lack of comprehension of my argument causes ignorant statements from you. Speciation is a tough argument for your side when the community is divided over what constitutes a species. If you want to call the many different dog breeds macroevolution or speciation that is fine and that is what you're in a sense doing but you will never see any breed of canine be a non-canine get it ?

You're asking the one that holds a degree in molecular biology if he is dense Like I said I will ignore your posts again. Listen to me really good,I agree with very little of that sites opinions, I was just merely pointing out the ignorance of daws and the others here that don't know what they are talking about.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Your confusion and ignorance deries from not reading the link you posted.

Speciation has been observed. This has been explained to you and other creationist multiple times.

Are you dense?

Ok, so a Orthodontist is specialized in his field. However, specialized, he is no less human. He might be taller, stronger, wiser, handsomer, but he still is very human ---- with some extra ability.

Speciation.

Good gawds, man.

Speciation.

Define a species and let me point out how your definition will contain contradictions are you ready ?