Do You Believe We Came From Monkeys?

[james bond]

If there was any BS, then the Bible would be disproven. The Resurrection would've been disproven. It has withstood the test of time. The Bible is inerrant, accurate, authoritative, true and complete.

LOL- how can you 'disprove' a book of fairy tales? How can I disprove Aesops fables?

How can I disprove Jesus's resurrection any more than i can disprove that that Athena was not born from the head of Zeus?

I am certain that the Bible is 'authoritative' to you- but certainly isn't to billions of other human beings.

As far as 'accurate'- there are some accuracies- hell bound to get something right- but plenty of inaccuracies.

I find it fascinating to watch the Christian cultists who insist that every word in the Bible is correct dance to rationalize around what is clearly just flat out false.

All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

Insects have 6 legs

We're not talking about Aesop's fables, but the Bible. What historical event which you consider "story" from there do want to discuss? There are parables in there that Christ Jesus used to teach which are stories.

You're referring to Leviticus 11:20-21 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.
Flying insects that walk on all fours would refer to for example the grasshopper as stated.



We see that it has six legs, but the two hind legs aren't considered for walking but hopping as stated. It walks on the four front legs.

Tell me all about these:
But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

What are the winged creatures that have four legs?
Bats? 2 legs
Birds? 2 legs
Insects? 6 legs

God is warning us not to eat bats. It walks on fours. You learn something new every day. I didn't know how they walked.



Are you and Fort Fun Indiana prepared to go to hell now?

So Bats don't have 2 legs and 2 wings- you are saying that Bats have 4 legs?

Fascinating.

You said a bat had 2 legs, but you are wrong. It's walking on fours, so the bat's wings are legs. Contrast it to the ostrich which has four limbs, but two legs just like us. Do you consider the wings of fowl arms? Are there any in that category that you cannot eat? If a bat has 2 legs like you said, then it's safe to eat but it isn't safe because it has four legs. Look up bats to see if they are safe to eat. Are there any other winged creatures that have four legs? What about a pteranodon? They would not be safe to eat as it walks on fours.

 

[james bond]

Here's the thing. Creationists here have been able to back up their creation science with actual evidence of what is explained in the Bible. OTOH, evolutionists here have not been able to provide any evidence. We still see that apes still walk on four legs and that we still have low intelligent humans such as Fort Fun Indiana. He's close to a monkey in intelligence, but it doesn't mean that he evolved from a monkey.

I dispute the claim that he evolved, at all.

Yup. I am waiting to see if he'll be willing to eat a bat to prove us wrong .

 

[james bond]

You do not have a reply to science backing up what is stated in the Bible.

Again dumbass -- you really are not getting this -- nobody needs to reply to that nonsense. It is nobody's job to dispel the magical bullshit you are peddling. Say any stupid thing you like....

No, the creationist here have demonstrated that they are true, right and just. The evos have not demonstrated anything, but their theories that have big assumptions and involve circular logic. And no one can demonstrate how long a billion years is and what happens during that time. I get the feeling that you will know how long billions of years are in the afterlife, but that you won't like it. I can wait several years for that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Probably because it's not a textbook, and "offering proof" is not its job

This is so weird. Sometimes, you freely admit that what you have is faith. Other times, you act embarrassed of your faith and you do that goofy thing where you try to equate it to actual knowledge.

The only thing that's weird is that you think your inability to understand what you're told is evidence that other people are wrong, or "embarrassed", or anything other than your own stupidity.

That's nice. Go on crybaby, get it all out of your system. Then have a look at the scoreboard, and realize that you magical thinkers have nothing hut each other. You have no evidence, not a single shred of published science or accepted theory, and none of you are even trying to produce any.

As such, I remain unmoved by your emotional little display.

You talk, and my mind boggles at how rich you would make some therapist.

Yes go ahead, religious nut ball, keep soothing and deluding yourself. It's what you're best at.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No, the creationist here have demonstrated that they are true, right and just.

No, you retards have done nothing but embarrass yourselves. You would get laughed out of a 6th grade science class. At the same time, you have been dancing and prancing and declaring victory. That is fucking embarrassing.

 

[james bond]

Probably because it's not a textbook, and "offering proof" is not its job

This is so weird. Sometimes, you freely admit that what you have is faith. Other times, you act embarrassed of your faith and you do that goofy thing where you try to equate it to actual knowledge.

The only thing that's weird is that you think your inability to understand what you're told is evidence that other people are wrong, or "embarrassed", or anything other than your own stupidity.

That's nice. Go on crybaby, get it all out of your system. Then have a look at the scoreboard, and realize that you magical thinkers have nothing hut each other. You have no evidence, not a single shred of published science or accepted theory, and none of you are even trying to produce any.

As such, I remain unmoved by your emotional little display.

You talk, and my mind boggles at how rich you would make some therapist.

Yes go ahead, religious nut ball, keep soothing and deluding yourself. It's what you're best at.

Only a nut ball would think believers to be nut balls just because they're believers. We don't think non-believers to be nut balls, but just ignorant. Until shown different. In your case, you have shown to be a nut ball of the supermax kind.

 

[Syriusly]

LOL- how can you 'disprove' a book of fairy tales? How can I disprove Aesops fables?

How can I disprove Jesus's resurrection any more than i can disprove that that Athena was not born from the head of Zeus?

I am certain that the Bible is 'authoritative' to you- but certainly isn't to billions of other human beings.

As far as 'accurate'- there are some accuracies- hell bound to get something right- but plenty of inaccuracies.

I find it fascinating to watch the Christian cultists who insist that every word in the Bible is correct dance to rationalize around what is clearly just flat out false.

All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

Insects have 6 legs

We're not talking about Aesop's fables, but the Bible. What historical event which you consider "story" from there do want to discuss? There are parables in there that Christ Jesus used to teach which are stories.

You're referring to Leviticus 11:20-21 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.
Flying insects that walk on all fours would refer to for example the grasshopper as stated.



We see that it has six legs, but the two hind legs aren't considered for walking but hopping as stated. It walks on the four front legs.

Tell me all about these:
But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

What are the winged creatures that have four legs?
Bats? 2 legs
Birds? 2 legs
Insects? 6 legs

God is warning us not to eat bats. It walks on fours. You learn something new every day. I didn't know how they walked.



Are you and Fort Fun Indiana prepared to go to hell now?

So Bats don't have 2 legs and 2 wings- you are saying that Bats have 4 legs?

Fascinating.

You said a bat had 2 legs, but you are wrong. It's walking on fours, so the bat's wings are legs. .

Does a bat have 2 wings and 2 legs or 4 legs?

Ah the dance the literalists must dance in order to rationalize how the Bible cannot be fallible.

 

[Syriusly]

LOL- how can you 'disprove' a book of fairy tales? How can I disprove Aesops fables?

How can I disprove Jesus's resurrection any more than i can disprove that that Athena was not born from the head of Zeus?

I am certain that the Bible is 'authoritative' to you- but certainly isn't to billions of other human beings.

As far as 'accurate'- there are some accuracies- hell bound to get something right- but plenty of inaccuracies.

I find it fascinating to watch the Christian cultists who insist that every word in the Bible is correct dance to rationalize around what is clearly just flat out false.

All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

Insects have 6 legs

We're not talking about Aesop's fables, but the Bible. What historical event which you consider "story" from there do want to discuss? There are parables in there that Christ Jesus used to teach which are stories.

You're referring to Leviticus 11:20-21 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.
Flying insects that walk on all fours would refer to for example the grasshopper as stated.



We see that it has six legs, but the two hind legs aren't considered for walking but hopping as stated. It walks on the four front legs.

Tell me all about these:
But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

What are the winged creatures that have four legs?
Bats? 2 legs
Birds? 2 legs
Insects? 6 legs

God is warning us not to eat bats. It walks on fours. You learn something new every day. I didn't know how they walked.



Are you and Fort Fun Indiana prepared to go to hell now?

So Bats don't have 2 legs and 2 wings- you are saying that Bats have 4 legs?

Fascinating.

Contrast it to the ostrich which has four limbs, but two legs just like us. Do you consider the wings of fowl arms? Are there any in that category that you cannot eat? If a bat has 2 legs like you said, then it's safe to eat but it isn't safe because it has four legs. Look up bats to see if they are safe to eat. Are there any other winged creatures that have four legs? What about a pteranodon? They would not be safe to eat as it walks on fours.

I don't know why you are prattling on about what creatures are safe to eat. The Bible doesn't talk about that and neither am I.

All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

Tell me what those other winged creatures that have 4 legs are.

 

[Syriusly]

You do not have a reply to science backing up what is stated in the Bible.

Again dumbass -- you really are not getting this -- nobody needs to reply to that nonsense. It is nobody's job to dispel the magical bullshit you are peddling. Say any stupid thing you like....

No, the creationist here have demonstrated that they are true, right and just. .

Just like homeopathic carpenters have demonstrated that they are true, right and just.

 

[Syriusly]

Nothing but crickets from our 'Creationists'.

lol

So according to the Bible- God created earth- and light- the first day- where did that light come from?

First day light came from EMS.

And I guess God created the atmosphere on the second day

Correct.

And apparently when the earth was first created there was no sea or ground- but on the third day he created 'land and 'seas'

The Earth was covered with water vapor and water. This was the first day. He pulled the water back to have dry land and plants and seas on the third day.

And here is where it gets really interesting- on the third day he created all of the plants of the world- and evening and morning

Day and night was created on the first day. Plants was on the third day.

Okay on the fourth day God created the Sun and the Moon. - and the stars.
So the order is:
a) Earth
b) Day/Night
c) Vegetation
d) Sun/moon

So- how did we have a day and night without a sun? How did the vegetation survives the absolute zero temperatures on earth without any sun being in existence?

You're using uniformitarianism. We had separation of light and dark. The way you envision night and day didn't happen until the sun, moon, stars and planets were created. Which is more believable? Evolutionary processes, the Big Bang, formed the universe from invisible particles and all these stars, suns, moons and planets just expanded out. And there was no intelligent design involved with the Earth just being in the right place and distance away from the sun or else it wouldn't thrive. And all the fine tuning facts had to be met.

No- I am using the actual words of Genesis.

But hey I get it- when the actual words of Genesis don't fit the scientific facts- you make up new definitions for words.

What is more believable? The theories that are supported by scientific evidence- not a book of fairy tales whose first chapter can't stand up to scientific scrutiny.

So- how did we have a day and night without a sun? How did the vegetation survive the absolute zero temperatures on earth without any sun being in existence?

At least, you're reading the Bible. That's a positive. Now, you want to understand it.

Genesis 1:3-5
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

Explanation (ICR, Answers in Genesis and gotquestions.org are good)
Sunlight Before the Sun

And again:

So- how did we have a day and night without a sun? How did the vegetation survive the absolute zero temperatures on earth without any sun being in existence?

 

[Syriusly]

Haha, look at the mental gymnastics you are forced to perform to fit your square book of fantasy into the round hole 9f modern science. Just stop, you are embarrassing yourself.

How many legs does an insect have?

Really you think that flies have hands?

LOL

How many legs does a baby have?

A baby has two legs.

Do you need some basic human anatomy lessons?

So then you have to honestly say that many insects (while having 6 appendages) often use 2 of them in the very same way humans use their appendages --- and visa versa. What we may unquestionably accept as "correct" scientific titles are not necessarily profoundly accurate nor are they written in stone.

So in other words- what was written in the Bible was not profoundly accurate- or written in stone.

I didn't say that flies have hands; however, they do use their front appendages in much the same way humans do. The Bible is without error (has never been proven wrong) .

I just showed one of the many errors in the Bible. You true believers will always rationalize why something that literally is factually incorrect is of course not incorrect- like flies with 'arms' not legs. And babies with 4 legs.

 

[Syriusly]

More from the 'infallible' Bible


Matthew 13:31 Another parable put he [Jesus] forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:

Matthew 13:32:1 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.[4].

Except of course- the mustard is not the smallest of all seeds- and it doesn't grow into a tree.

Except for that of course.

 

[Syriusly]

Pi

Visualization.
The Bible mentions a circle whose dimensions would make pi equal to 3. This has been a source of humor for skeptics and consternation for literalist Christians and Jews.

The cauldron is first mentioned in 1 Kings 7:23-26 (KJV):

And he made a molten sea [cauldron], ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. And under the brim of it round about there were knops compassing it, ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about: the knops were cast in two rows, when it was cast. It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward. And it was an hand breadth thick, and the brim thereof was wrought like the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies: it contained two thousand baths.

 

[LittleNipper]

How many legs does a baby have?

A baby has two legs.

Do you need some basic human anatomy lessons?

So then you have to honestly say that many insects (while having 6 appendages) often use 2 of them in the very same way humans use their appendages --- and visa versa. What we may unquestionably accept as "correct" scientific titles are not necessarily profoundly accurate nor are they written in stone.

So in other words- what was written in the Bible was not profoundly accurate- or written in stone.

I didn't say that flies have hands; however, they do use their front appendages in much the same way humans do. The Bible is without error (has never been proven wrong) .

I just showed one of the many errors in the Bible. You true believers will always rationalize why something that literally is factually incorrect is of course not incorrect- like flies with 'arms' not legs. And babies with 4 legs.

What gives you the right to label and designate what is "correct" and what isn't? I have demonstrated that scientists who insist that the Bible is wrong when it says that various insects have four legs are ignoring obvious considerations all for the sake of supposed "scientific" correctness. The Bible isn't wrong in this regard. It is a matter of semantics --- get over yourself. I believe the term appendage is rather simplistic and doesn't indicate use or application --- if you like the generic. But the reality would then be that flies have 6 appendages and humans have 4. The Bible didn't use the term appendage and I can plainly see how flies use their appendages in various ways very similar to humans. I really don't imagine scientist really care one way or another... They have bigger concerns.

 

[LittleNipper]

More from the 'infallible' Bible


Matthew 13:31 Another parable put he [Jesus] forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:

Matthew 13:32:1 Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.[4].

Except of course- the mustard is not the smallest of all seeds- and it doesn't grow into a tree.

Except for that of course.

 

[LittleNipper]

Pi

Visualization.
The Bible mentions a circle whose dimensions would make pi equal to 3. This has been a source of humor for skeptics and consternation for literalist Christians and Jews.

The cauldron is first mentioned in 1 Kings 7:23-26 (KJV):

And he made a molten sea [cauldron], ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about. And under the brim of it round about there were knops compassing it, ten in a cubit, compassing the sea round about: the knops were cast in two rows, when it was cast. It stood upon twelve oxen, three looking toward the north, and three looking toward the west, and three looking toward the south, and three looking toward the east: and the sea was set above upon them, and all their hinder parts were inward. And it was an hand breadth thick, and the brim thereof was wrought like the brim of a cup, with flowers of lilies: it contained two thousand baths.

Contradictions: As Easy as Pi

 

[LittleNipper]

John 8:12 English Standard Version (ESV)
I Am the Light of the World
12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

Revelation 21:23
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

 

[james bond]

We're not talking about Aesop's fables, but the Bible. What historical event which you consider "story" from there do want to discuss? There are parables in there that Christ Jesus used to teach which are stories.

You're referring to Leviticus 11:20-21 "All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.
Flying insects that walk on all fours would refer to for example the grasshopper as stated.



We see that it has six legs, but the two hind legs aren't considered for walking but hopping as stated. It walks on the four front legs.

Tell me all about these:
But all other winged creatures that have four legs you are to detest

What are the winged creatures that have four legs?
Bats? 2 legs
Birds? 2 legs
Insects? 6 legs

God is warning us not to eat bats. It walks on fours. You learn something new every day. I didn't know how they walked.



Are you and Fort Fun Indiana prepared to go to hell now?

So Bats don't have 2 legs and 2 wings- you are saying that Bats have 4 legs?

Fascinating.

You said a bat had 2 legs, but you are wrong. It's walking on fours, so the bat's wings are legs. .

Does a bat have 2 wings and 2 legs or 4 legs?

Ah the dance the literalists must dance in order to rationalize how the Bible cannot be fallible.

I've already explained this. The bat walks on fours, so it's one of the flying creatures with four legs.

I already posted a nice 4 min vid to show bats walking and other interesting traits they have. Others are pteranodon, pterodactyl and others that God warned not to eat. Most of the others are fowl which have four limbs and two legs for walking. These are safe to eat.

I'm going to pass on your other questions because they are too tedious. I end up answering questions and you just ignore and insult. OTOH, you never answer my questions or ignore.

God warns YOU that you will reap what we sow.

Galatians 6:7
"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap."

My advice is to stop the mockery and continue reading the Bible with an open mind.

I can find video evidence of how God's Words are true. However, you can't provide any evidence of apes becoming bipedal nor becoming ape-human. We discussed which came first the chicken or the egg and you or some other non-believer said proto-chicken. We have no video of a proto-chicken living today. It just goes to show why intelligent people do not believe and question evolution today.

 

[Syriusly]

A baby has two legs.

Do you need some basic human anatomy lessons?

So then you have to honestly say that many insects (while having 6 appendages) often use 2 of them in the very same way humans use their appendages --- and visa versa. What we may unquestionably accept as "correct" scientific titles are not necessarily profoundly accurate nor are they written in stone.

So in other words- what was written in the Bible was not profoundly accurate- or written in stone.

I didn't say that flies have hands; however, they do use their front appendages in much the same way humans do. The Bible is without error (has never been proven wrong) .

I just showed one of the many errors in the Bible. You true believers will always rationalize why something that literally is factually incorrect is of course not incorrect- like flies with 'arms' not legs. And babies with 4 legs.

What gives you the right to label and designate what is "correct" and what isn't? I have demonstrated that scientists who insist that the Bible is wrong when it says that various insects have four legs are ignoring obvious considerations all for the sake of supposed "scientific" correctness. The Bible isn't wrong in this regard. It is a matter of semantics --- get over yourself. I believe the term appendage is rather simplistic and doesn't indicate use or application --- if you like the generic. But the reality would then be that flies have 6 appendages and humans have 4. The Bible didn't use the term appendage and I can plainly see how flies use their appendages in various ways very similar to humans. I really don't imagine scientist really care one way or another... They have bigger concerns.

You are the one who insists that the Bible is infallible- not me.

I just pointed out an obvious mistake in the Bible.

Because you operate on unquestioning faith in the infallibility of the Bible- you have to rationalize how the obvious error in the Bible isn't really an error- that is just your faith in action.

Not science. Not fact. Not logic.

 

[Syriusly]

John 8:12 English Standard Version (ESV)
I Am the Light of the World
12 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

Revelation 21:23
The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

Pretty quote.

My favorite quote from the New Testament because it is such a powerful philosophical message:

Matthew 5:43-48 New International Version (NIV)
Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbora]">[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.