As in the days of Noah.....

[baydoll]

Not trying to be argumentive here but I have always wondered if we are supposed to have descended from apes why do we still have apes? Reminds me of this one song I know that says "Well if all of this is true then I've got relatives in the zoo!"

Excellent question!

Perhaps Xaquin, or Nucklesack can answer if for us?

 

[baydoll]

the theory isn't that we evolved from apes, but that we have a common ancestor.

you know, like a lab and a wolf, or a koala and a polar bear might

And where did you get this 'theory' of yours?

 

[baydoll]

You fall under the same trap as This_Person, instead of doing your own investigation of a person (or report) you instead rely upon what others have told you.

I hardly think that Strobel, who was a teaching pastor of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Illinois, from 1987 to 2000, and of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California from 2000 to 2002 could be construed as a neutral party in the research about Christ.

Lee Strobel's Bio:

Lee was educated at the University of Missouri (Bachelor of Journalism degree, 1974) and Yale Law School (Master of Studies in Law degree, 1979). He was a professional journalist for 14 years at The Chicago Tribune and other newspapers, winning Illinois’ top honors for investigative reporting (which he shared with a team he led) and public service journalism from United Press International.

After a nearly two-year investigation of the evidence for Jesus, Lee received Christ as his forgiver and leader in 1981. He joined the staff of Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, IL, in 1987, and later became a teaching pastor there. He joined Saddleback Valley Community Church in Lake Forest, CA, as a teaching pastor in 2000. He left Saddleback’s staff in mid-2002 to focus on writing. He is also a contributing editor and columnist for Outreach magazine.

Strobel wasn't a Christian when he was writing that book.

Paul Doland commented that Strobel portrays himself as a skeptic who would ensure a balanced perspective on the issue, but no scientists who oppose the concept of a Factual Jesus were interviewed in the book and that the book claims to investigate scientific evidence for a creator, but most of the interviewees have their doctorates in philosophy or theology, rather than science

Then let's see you refute all of Mr. Strobels arguments, Nucklesack...I'll even post them from his book on this thread myself and you can go through them one by one.

Its kinda like claiming the Christian Cadre was "Non-Christian References to Jesus

Then you should have no problems whatsoever refuting all of what Mr. Strobel came up with in his book.

What say you? Game?

 

[Xaquin44]

Excellent question!

Perhaps Xaquin, or Nucklesack can answer if for us?

it was already answered .... but I suppose reading the thread is too taxing ....

 

[baydoll]

No it wasn't, Xaquin.

 

[Xaquin44]

No it wasn't, Xaquin.

you even quoted the answer ....

 

[baydoll]

This is the last post for the day and then I am off for the weekend.

Unlike the Bible and events in the Bible, Wind can be measured, the result of Radio/TV waves can be seen, I can see my brain.

You can ‘see’ tv/radio waves? Well that’s amazing considering how the rest of us of can’t. And just exactly how and in what way can you ‘see’ your brain? Can you literally take it out and look at it? Do you slice it open and hand it out so everyone can admire it?

Unlike the God and Jesus myth, the evidence of history is not hearsay, in that it is not just from secondary sources. There are documents written and signed by figures throughout history, there are first-hand accounts of Historical Figures speeches and statements recorded at the time they were actually said, rather than after the fact.

So please prove that God and Jesus is a myth and the Bible is not true. Have you actually read anything, Christian or otherwise, that tried to explain otherwise? I mean, honestly? Let's face it, all you do is attack any and all evidence Christians do provide. The only thing you will research is anti-Christian material. This is neither fair nor rational. A SINCERE seeker of truth would look for just that—TRUTH. We all have our biases and they tend to blind us to the other possiblities out there…if we’re HONEST with ourselves (and others) we will study ALL positions with an open mind UNTIL they prove themselves to be not true. Have you done this?

In the case of God and Jesus, everything is hearsay and there is no quality evidence outside of the bible which supports his existence. That is fact.

No that is your opinion, whether you like it or not (and apparently you don’t). Have you researched ALL the evidence out there?

Do know the combined weight of all the sand on all the beaches on the islands of this world? Do you know that Library of Congress has nearly 128 million items on approximately 530 miles of bookshelves with a collection that include more than 29 million books and other printed materials, 2.7 million recordings, 12 million photographs, 4.8 million maps, and 57 million manuscripts? Have you read them all? Probably not. I think, therefore, that it reasonable for me to conclude that there are some things you don’t know. THAT's a fact.

It's not an "opinion". It's a fact. Again, it goes back to the selective consciousness common among a large number of Christians believing what's convient, and ignoring fact and hard evidence when it's not.

So let’s see this ‘hard evidence’.

Please provide for us all this independent evidence and facts that proves Jesus DID NOT exist as a historical figure.


Here’s a VERY BRIEF (as in I have no time right now to actually to list them all) list of reasons why it is easier to believe Jesus did exist:
1. The entire bible tells us Jesus existed, but the proof that the bible is God's word is far to countless to list here in this answer.
2. Josephus a non-Christian historian contemporary to Jesus writes about Jesus and the events of Jesus.
3. Tacitus another ancient Roman historian writes about Jesus.
4. Thallus and Julius Africanus ancient historians write of Jesus.
5. Nero and other Roman Ceasar's persecuted and tortured Christians for not denouncing their faith in Jesus Christ.
6. The Romans tortured and killed thousand of Christians in the Coliseum for their faith in Jesus, another well documented historical fact.
7. Many of the 12 disciples were brutally killed along with their families for not denouncing that Jesus Christ rose from the Dead.

( Thanks to a Christian brother from another board for the above. )

Okay that's it for me today I'm off for the weekend!

See you all on Monday.

 

[Xaquin44]

And just exactly how and in what way can you ‘see’ your brain? Can you literally take it out and look at it? Do you slice it open and hand it out so everyone can admire it?

AHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAA

ahahahahhaa


whew


AHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

hahahhaha

oh dear me.

ok, I'm officially ignoring baydoll from now on. No one could possibly be this stupid.

I'm pretty sure everyone here (well, except apparently baydoll) has heard of brain surgery .... Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) ....

I know it must be scary because it's 'science', but I assure you that you can see your brain.


hahahahaha

 

[foodcritic]

he's drunk

AHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAA

ahahahahhaa


whew


AHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

hahahhaha

oh dear me.

ok, I'm officially ignoring baydoll from now on. No one could possibly be this stupid.

I'm pretty sure everyone here (well, except apparently baydoll) has heard of brain surgery .... Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) ....

I know it must be scary because it's 'science', but I assure you that you can see your brain.


hahahahaha

Never argue with a drunk. Xanadu appears to be just that

 

[Xaquin44]

Never argue with a drunk. Xanadu appears to be just that

you .... agree with baydoll that you can not see your brain?

who is Xanadu?

 

[tirdun]

Which addressed none of the following:

Since you're asking simplistic questions, I'll give semi-simplistic answers. I've had to cut a few to keep it under length.

Where the first DNA came from

Earlier genetic material, such as RNA and replicating protein strains

the vast amounts of information in animal/human DNA,

From the earlier, lesser amounts of information in other DNA. Compare to creatures with the smallest amount of DNA

how molecular machines evolved,

From other molecular machines, some of which are naturally occuring even today.

how the first cell lived in its hostile environment long enough to reproduce

It wasn't a hostile environment.

what the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduced

You're ignoring the varieties of asexual reproduction. It isn't limited to self-reproduction, there are clear steps between true cloning and genetic transfer through sex.

how single-celled plants become multi-celled

Bifurcation, for one.

where the abundance of transitional species are,

Museums. Biology textbooks. Still in the ground. Lost to time.

where the human fossil record are

See above

why some animals, according to the fossil record, did not evolve further

There was no evolutionary drive to do so. Sharks are a very successful species. Without a push to evolve (environmental change, lack of food, competition for mates, competition for food) there is no reason for one biological variation to be more successful than another.

why monkeys are still around

Because they didn't all die? Why wouldn't monkey's be around? Evolution isn't a switch that gets thrown in every member of a species making them something else.

why creatures produced by chance do not have random thoughts

I'll answer if you explain what this has to do with evolution using a true, scientific definition for evolution

why creatures produced by chance have moral values

See above, but I will point out that altruism and charity have benefits to a group, meaning that if all members of a species have some capacity for altruism it increases the chance of survival.

why creatures produced by chance have feelings and emotions and how did they evolve

I don't know "why", and you're still not describing how evolution works. On this one I'll point out that numerous other mammals have emotions and feelings, including clear examples of empathy, charity, justice and mourning.

why there is order in all organisms compared to chaos in the world around it

Really? I don't see this chaos and order. Perhaps if you gave some clear examples.

where the space for the universe came from

Space exists only in the universe because the universe itself exists. See? It's like asking where the hole in the donut came from if there were no donut. Perhaps if you studied some astrophysics.

where matter came from

Which has to do with what?

where the laws of the universe came from (gravity, inertia, etc.)

The laws are measurements of phenomena as we understand them. The first law of physics, for example, came from Newton's measurements of the world around him. Later Einstein over-wrote those laws with new laws. If you're asking where the gravity comes from, the answer is that we don't know, and we don't understand it entirely in the first place.

how matter got so perfectly organized

Matter isn't perfectly organized. It's messily crunched together.

where did energy come from to do all the organizing

Actually, the "organization" of matter, as you call it, reduces the overall potential of the energy in the universe. Every bit of so-called organization is slowly killing the universe by sucking away energy toward an ultimate death in darkness. As to where the original energy came from, all signs point the fact that it came from an enormous explosion at a central point in the universe some 14 billion years ago. It's tough to get more specific than that, because your great laws don't seem to apply very well beyond a certain point, and it all happened so long ago, you see. BUT I'm over-answering your simplistic (and probably copy-pasted) question.

when, where, why, and how life came from dead matter

"dead" means that it was once alive. You're asking for a definition of abiogenesis and you can't even properly do so.

when, where, why, and how life learn to reproduce itself

Ditto, see above, ibid, etc. Life, by definition, reproduces itself. See? Your question is illogical.

what the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce

Didn't you already cut-paste.... er ASK this question? You want an example, fine. Take a creature that reproduces by spraying genetic material to itself in a water environment. Think flower: pistol, stem, that sort of thing. It's a small step from squirting to itself to squirting to a neighbor and the genetic changes that become available through the small loss of energy entailed by moving this step external to the organism are immense. Asexual (impregnating itself) to sexual (impregnating a neighbor) is a simple step that is not a lost cause if there is no neighbor to reproduce with. This is one example.

Single-celled plants became multi-celled? (Where are the two and three-celled intermediates?)

There probably were no 3 celled creatures because simple duplication without disconnection produces a 2 celled creature. If those two then duplicate, you get a 4,8,16 celled creature that is safer simply by being harder to destroy. Add specialization and you get all sorts of wonderful steps.

Single-celled animals evolved?

You're asking me to go through everything we do and don't know about abiogenisis and you'll claim a WIN if I can't undermine your existing conclusions somehow.

Fish changed to amphibians?

Not that amazing, there are fish today with lungs, creatures that have simple box lungs that work equally well in and out of water.

Amphibians changed to reptiles?

Can you even define the difference between an amphibian and reptile?

Reptiles changed to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different.)

Yes, they're all very different ... in modern birds. In ancient birds and reptiles, they're very similar.

and how the intermediate forms lived?

Every species is an intermediate from the prior to the next species, assuming there is a next species and they don't go extinct.

Whales evolved?

Whales evolved from Basilosaurus, which evolved from Rhodocetus. We have very, very nice fossils from this transition and whales are actually a very nice example of where the transitional fossils were predicted before they were found. The finding verified the prediction and expanded our knowledge. It used to be, probably back when these questions were FIRST asked (whenever that was) that whales were not so well understood in evolutionary terms. DNA mapping has helped quite a bit, and now we know that hippos are probably the closest living animal to whales. Hippos, you know, the semi-aquatic land mammals.

 

[tirdun]

Part II

Sea horses evolved? Bats evolved?

Mice evolved? Clams evolved? Trillobites evolved? Are you just going to keep demanding complex answers through simplistic questions you could research yourself?

Eyes evolved?

Ah, the eye. There are hundreds of varieties in nature, from simple eye spots that barely register light to ultra-complex examples. Oh, not human eyes, they're very simple and the lineage of steps is pretty well documented in modern animals. You can find simpler and simpler examples of the orb+single lens throughout nature. Eyes found in insects, however, are vastly more complicated.

Ears evolved?

That one's more interesting. Ears are modified jaw joints. The fossil record is very complete on ears.

Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolved?

Toes, colons, bronchial fibers, cancer cells, dislocated elbows?

Hair is a tube modification to a cell about to be discarded. It's well understood. Feathers are modified hair structures using more tubes. Not as well understood but not a complete mystery. Etc. Etc.

which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others):
The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)?

First would have been the ability to consume nutrients, since you can consume inorganics and process them as needed. Digestion and appetite would have been WAY later, since having undigested food is just a waste of energy, not a critical function. Finding food would have been after food, since there are all sorts of creatures that find food without looking for it (current and filter feeders, for example).

The drive to reproduced or the ability to reproduced?

Drive after ability. Early reproduction was very simple and would have been done without any conscious effort, since there was no brain to make the effort. All sorts of small creatures reproduce without "drive" today.

The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?

See modern creatures. You're using humans when there are plenty of creatures with lungs without such structures to protect them.

the plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?

Blah blah. The plants. Co-evolution to better procreate would have followed the plants dropping seeds on the wind, like many simple plants still do.

the bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones? the nervous system, repair system, or hormone system? the immune system or the need for it?

Again, there are modern examples that clearly show the evolution of these things. The original author (I'm not keeping up the illusion that you typed any of this) had to have known that creatures exist with one, but not both/all of these things. It can clearly work, why is it a question?

Mimicry... Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?

Evolution. A creature that looks even slightly like a creature that's dangerous might be skipped as a meal. The more they look dangerous, the more likely they are not to be eaten.

when, where, why, and how man evolved feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc?

Tell me why they couldn't evolve? Why do other creatures have them if they're so special?

how photosynthesis evolved?

Not that exciting, look at fungus and other creatures with simple light to energy systems and be amazed that they still live.

How flowering plants evolved, and from what?

From non-flowering plants. Yay!

named one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proven true?

As mentioned, It was predicted that we would find certain fossils, since they had to exist and we found them. It's been predicted that certain creatures would evolve beyond their current species, meaning that they would no longer be able to reproduce with the parent species, and it happened. Science predicted that artificial materials would cause the creation of creatures capable of consuming those materials, and it happened. A lab recently predicted that they could create a bacteria that could eat the very chemical that was used to kill it if given enough generations. It did, by creating an entirely new species.

 

[Xaquin44]

the sad thing is, that she won't understand any of that, nor will she care =(

excellent correct answers.

 

[This_person]

I realize these weren't answers to me, though I've asked many similar questions. You have completely failed at proving a thing.

It wasn't a hostile environment.

You know what the environment was? That puts you above 100% of the rest of the population, who can only speculate without proof.

Museums. Biology textbooks. Still in the ground. Lost to time.

You have faith in that, or direct proof? Or, more guesses?

There was no evolutionary drive to do so. Sharks are a very successful species. Without a push to evolve (environmental change, lack of food, competition for mates, competition for food) there is no reason for one biological variation to be more successful than another.

So, what is the source of that "drive"? Humans seemingly fared just fine when we were shorter and lived shorter lives, so what caused the changes? Sponges exist just fine - they're a successful species - so why did anything evolve past sponges?

You're making a circular, illogical argument that doesn't answer the question.

Space exists only in the universe because the universe itself exists.

But, where did the universe come from? Where did the matter come from for the universe? Or, are you suggesting that it always existed - violating the laws of thermodynamics?

Perhaps if you studied some astrophysics.

Ditto!

Which has to do with what?

A mind so inquisitive would have us, uh, NOWHERE! The building blocks of the universe came from somewhere, isn't that a good place to start for how things happened - where the stuff comes from?

Actually, the "organization" of matter, as you call it, reduces the overall potential of the energy in the universe. Every bit of so-called organization is slowly killing the universe by sucking away energy toward an ultimate death in darkness.

Are you suggesting, by saying "sucking away energy" that energy can be created? Or destroyed? Because, last I heard, it could be neither created nor destroyed, just changed in form. Or, are you referring to entropy?

As to where the original energy came from, all signs point the fact that it came from an enormous explosion at a central point in the universe some 14 billion years ago. It's tough to get more specific than that, because your great laws don't seem to apply very well beyond a certain point, and it all happened so long ago, you see.

Okay, great - the Big Bang. And, what about before that?

One of the great questions regarding God is - where did He come from? That question stops many non-thinki...er, athiests from ever contemplating believing in a God. So, where did the universe come from, some 14 billion years ago? What was here before that, same as with the question of "who created God"?

All science does is redirect the unanswerable questions. And, meanwhile, the Big Bang and Genesis are pretty much 100% compatible when one realizes that a "day" is yet to be defined in Genesis. Both of these faith-based concepts work well together.

You're asking for a definition of abiogenesis and you can't even properly do so.

And, clearly, attacking the asker's way of asking the question answers it? Uh, no.

How DID life come from lifelessness? Why don't we see it happen any more? Why didn't it happen anywhere else that we can see? Is that a better way of asking?

You're asking me to go through everything we do and don't know about abiogenisis and you'll claim a WIN if I can't undermine your existing conclusions somehow.

Actually, no, she's asking about evolution. Abiogenesis is life from lifelessness. Once the life is there, it's evolution of that life. If you're going to criticize, understand what you're attacking.

And, there is no "win". The fact is that no one knows, no one can know. It's faith on every side as to what happened. "Winning" would be actual proof - which no one will ever have. "Opening your mind" would be atheists accepting that simple truth.

 

[baydoll]

AHAHHAHAHAHHAHHAA

ahahahahhaa


whew


AHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

hahahhaha

oh dear me.

ok, I'm officially ignoring baydoll from now on. No one could possibly be this stupid.

I'm pretty sure everyone here (well, except apparently baydoll) has heard of brain surgery .... Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) ....

I know it must be scary because it's 'science', but I assure you that you can see your brain.


hahahahaha

If you haven't noticed, an MRI is an IMAGE not the real thing. I assure you that what you are 'seeing' is a picture and not the real deal, sweetie.

Tremendous difference there.

 

[baydoll]

the sad thing is, that she won't understand any of that, nor will she care =(

Wrong again.

 

[baydoll]

excellent correct answers

I agree...This Person DID give excellent answers! Thank, This Person!

 

[baydoll]

Where the first DNA came from

Earlier genetic material, such as RNA and replicating protein strains

And where did those come from?

 

[tommyjones]

If you haven't noticed, an MRI is an IMAGE not the real thing. I assure you that what you are 'seeing' is a picture and not the real deal, sweetie.

Tremendous difference there.

doctors are perfectly capable of taking the top (or other portion) of your shull out and playing with your brain. additonally the MRI is an image of your brain. We also know from disection that people and most other animals have brains. brains exist in a concrete- NO FAITH kind of way

seems like you are missing something.

 

[baydoll]

the vast amounts of information in animal/human DNA,

From the earlier, lesser amounts of information in other DNA. Compare to creatures with the smallest amount of DNA

Again, please tell us where the smallest amount of DNA come from?