(notice that the two are mutually exclusive)

Ah, I forgot, "Southernpride" had to go take a test

Weird

Southernpatriot*

THEY TYPIN'

typing a fucking storm

ok but the problem with not taking the Bible literally is that it undermines the entire religion. The catholics may believe in evolution, but by doing so they are undermining their religion. The Bible gives us an eye witness account of creation whereas evolution has no eye witness accounts. There are so many holes in the evolution argument. The transitional bones you mentioned earlier, aren't actually transitional bones. They are simply bone variations. How do you explain DNA? how does human DNA just appear from monkeys? The theory of evolution keeps changing too. They keep saying the earth is older and older they don't have a set age. They can't figure it out.

An entire treatise!!!

I'm back. Did well on my test. I do agree the big bang to be quite plausible and accept micro evolution. I gave the definition I operate on in my long message. Macro evolution I don't accept. Even from a logical perspective as I'm trying to discuss it from a logical perspective with an admitted Christian bias. Going on the presumption of the old earth, which I agree is very plausible and why I don't debate on the age of the earth. However, circumstances in the lab can be manipulated. Beyond that, yes, amino acids were created artificially, yet amino acids are critical to life, yet are not living themselves. Which, to my point in my long message is still non life and there is not yet substianted evidence that life can come from non life. I feel like I am to a degree regurgitating what I said in my large message.

Yeah, that's the point. if there are fundamental problems with the Bible that implies that the entire religion is unfounded. The key to change your beliefs to adapt to the new science and new information, not double down on your misinformation

except for the fact that I believe in creation so the religion isn't crumbling we find the problem in evolution and the answer that keeps on changing... how old is the earth? evolutionists can't give you an answer

I said it's plausible.

ok but the radiometric dating has proven to be flawed and not accurate

because scientists aren't working backwards. They aren't giving a number out of thin air and then trying to find data to prove it. They are always getting new information which is why we have a vague estimate but not an exact answer.

Dunno if you've already said this: science is meant to provide concrete explanations of the unknown. Religion is supposed to shed light on the unknown in a non-substantive way. One is clearly more valid than the other. Thus, scientific data must always be valued more than religious philosophy. That is the beginning of the end of Christianity, as science disproves key parts of it

The key to Christianity is not science. That can't make it break Christianity. The hingepin of Christianity is the death and resurrection of Jesus.

bruh

I love how Christians will say "science proves religion true" but thats a bullshit argument.

But if massive parts of the bible can be disproven or ignored can we trust any of it?

but they have though research the flaws with radiometric dating they are obvious.

That's why I try to dodge it.

That is the question and I don't have the answer. It again points to faith.

But when they already know how old something is and radiometric date it and it says its about a million years older I would say that's flawed

Really? Your only justification is to blindly believe in what has otherwise been disproven?

Because in several circumstances, the other hasn't been conclusively proven. I refer you back to my long essay from yesterday.

Ok but lets say they all are proven to be flawed... then what?

The thing is, although science hasn't found a "completely 100% definitive answer" to something like the Earth's age, we've learned enough to know that the Christian explanation is wrong, so we should stop talking about it and work to find the real answer.

the question is has anyone witnessed the beginning of earth? So technically speaking (if we are not counting creation) then this is all just speculation. Both opinions are wrong. We don't have any evidence for either.

Like God

Sorry this is off topic but @Southernpatriot01 am I right in thinking that you guys made a Christian server a while back? If yes, could I join?

We did.

@Southernpatriot01 would I be able to join as well?

Yes.

I think they have a lot of faith

supposedly

Well I have said in my large message that I'm not a scientist.

can they?

but every time I research evolution I see holes

no but it does mean evolution isn't right either

But here's the thing

Evolution doesn't have to be fully fledged out to disprove God