Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Wikipedia tells a different story. I do have a question: if the Earth was created 6000 years ago, does the birth year of the Earth change +1 each year?

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

No. But obviously there was no-one living in Europe within 14 years (there is no year 0AD/BC) of creation day 6. Cain might have children so early but would have to have waited for his sister to be born and in any event travelled east.

Seth's earliest recorded child was at age 105 but that was 235 years after creation bringing us to 5,739 years ago before anyone was available for migration to Europe. A single person moving there would produce zero population, even so.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Wickedpedia is owned and operated by communists, who allow literally anyone to waltz into their website and alter information. The page on me has been filled with lies and innuendos for years.

Trust in God, friend. God can wash your filthy eurotrash sins away with His blood, did you know that?

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

If we came from cells why do cells still exist?

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

"Peer Review" is just pinko lib-tard code for "Circle Jerk", pardon my French.

YICLL

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Satan wants people to believe in Evolution. That is probably the main reason Evolution is so popular. Satan is a Deceiver (John 8:44), and he wants people to believe God's Word is not True. He keeps the belief in Evolution popular so he can us it to lead people away from Jesus.

It's important, now more than ever, to just say No to Evolution, Public Schools and Public Broadcasting, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Books over 100 pages (except the Bible), and immodest clothing, especially culottes. Culottes are nothing more than Satan's Red Arrow pointing towards Sin in fabric.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

You said not to use anything invented by physicists at the same time you used a computer built from the principle laid down the physicists to spread your message??

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

My computer wasn't made by a physicist, dear. I bought it at Best Buy who bought it from some warehouse in China after children younger than my own assembled it together for 15 hours a day, as Jesus intended.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

I apologise for my stupid comment.Yesterday I learned how holy is landover baptist Church is. I should not have talked that way.
From now onward, I will be a true Christian who will devote his life to the true God.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

I thought computers were invented using biological?

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Evolution is s---l---o---w. God's creation was quick. Why are people so attracted to the idea of evolution anyway?

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

I've often wondered that, too. It has no historical basis, unlike Christianity which is based on historical facts, other than from unspeakably barbaric heathens prior to Christ whose ravings were fortunately destroyed so that Jesus could establish His teachings throughout the world.

One such was Empedocles, a Greek savage, whose proposition that humans developed gradually over time—assembling physical traits (such as legs or necks) from preexisting iterations—was essentially poetic but nevertheless pagan. Sadly the destruction of Greek philosophy was not complete and it was revived after a millennium or two enabling Charles Darwin to flesh out the poetry with some propositions of his own. The two ideas are not the same but the attraction of one may be very like the attraction of the other which is the attraction of impiety and nihilism. Herehttp://www.23hq.com/23666/25790756_e...04be_thumb.jpg is a sample of the poetry:

Quote:

Hear this. For my tale is not aimless nor ignorant. First, roughhttp://www.23hq.com/23666/32058623_9...a8b9_thumb.jpg outlines sprang up from the earth … As yet they displayed neither the lovely framework of limbs Nor the voice and the organ that is native to men.

That isn't Darwinism but does contradict God's explanation that humans were formed intact in a single operation of His will. In both cases though, the "lovely framework of limbs" was selected for over eons as was the "voice" (language, poetry, song) and the "organ that is native to men" whether from characteristics of progenitor species or Boschhttp://www.23hq.com/23666/25790636_7...9539_thumb.jpg style unloveliness:

Quote:

Attachment 29300Attachment 29301Attachment 29302Attachment 29303

What is held in common is the idea of a struggle. Darwin proposed a struggle between the species themselves (the better camouflaged or faster runners not being eaten and therefore able to breed) as well as struggles in a changing environment (bombardment with comets, ice ages) and the need for family groups to care for one another, such as herds of wildebeest prevailing successfully against lions. Empedocles' equivalenthttp://www.23hq.com/23666/25790637_f...53c6_thumb.jpg was the tension between Love and Strife, which you can read about in the footnote. Drivel of the first water, as is all pagan dogma, hence the attraction of evolution across centuries. God must be contradicted by certain types (the majority) but there is a connecting thread. Satan. When the Romans invented pontiffs to go along with Greek hocus-pocus they created a devilish thread connecting Empedocles with Darwin and pontiffs of the modern era and it's drivel all the way down. Satan wants everyone to pagan it up at home and what better way than this? So he makes it attractive to people.






____________

1. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/empedocles/#Zoog
2. or: complete - the idea is that elements of the human body diversified or resulted from an
2. earlier fragmentation before emerging in their current form.
3. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Bosch_laatste_oordeel_drieluik.jpg
4. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/empedocles/#RootForc

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

A rapist would be classified as a successful individual by Darwinism.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Bible should be taken literally,
if not, it's not the Word of God :kjv1611:it's Word of God, because it's have to be taken literally.

KJV gave us the timeless meaning, as God intended, because God is timeless.
A Bible that it's not taketh literally it's not true Bible. It can spawn different meanings and interpretations.
But if you take it literally, the you will haveth truth. A Bible taken literally have only ONE meaning and only ONE interpretation.

Human wasn't created by evolution, but by God.
He was created twice.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

It's good to see you're reading The Bible. So many folk, not happy with God's actions or the reasons why Jesus needed to die, make up a different story for themselves with characters almost but not quite entirely unlike those in The Bible. ("Almost" means they might have the same name, if you're lucky.)

When Jesus explained things, He was always clear if what He was saying was a parable. Recently we read about the sower. It needn't be about a particular farmer——Jim, say——sowing a particular bag of seed in field #26 last spring on Thursday. For His purposes though the farmer was just doing something everyone would have seen. The seeds could have been anything, wheat, vanilla, acorns, it doesn't matter.

Luke 8:1-8; Matthew 13:3-9; Mark 4:2-9 And it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him, and certain women, which had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, out of whom went seven devils, and Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance. And when much people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city, he spake by a parable: A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Here we have a lovely scene, Jesus with ex-demon-possessed women (three of whom are named) and the twelve disciples. Sometimes you'll tell a person something, "Don't jump through glass windows, you'll cut yourself!" but they're off with the fairies and keep going on about how Nutbag The Detective on their idiotic TV show jumps through glass stuff all the time "cuz 'e's 'ard" he's what? "'aaaaard!" and even though you think your wasting your time: "DON'T JUMP THROUGH GLASS WINDOWS YOU'LL CUT YOURSELF!!" even pointing out that windows in TV shows are made out of sugar and you already know what's coming don't you. Yes, they see a nice window in a half-built house (or 'ouse) take a run up and a flying leap arms and legs waving gracelessly followed by, "Ow! ow! ow! ow! Why didn't you tell me?" Then anticipate you, or the public purse to which you contribute, will employ a doctor to sew them up with additional monies for blood transfusions, ambulances, anaesthetists, morphine, antibiotics, extended use of a hospital bed and rehabilitation no doubt but probably not ongoing medication unless they got addicted to the morphine.

Jesus was not addicted to morphine. His words are not ravings from fairy land. Later on, when The Good News was being explained to the heathens around, the idea of a message being shared with one person who could tell the next person who could tell someone else and so on becomes very important. What will the person sharing the first message have to eat? Clothes? Transport? Farmers can eat some of their crop. But how do you eat words?

II Corinthians 9:6-11 [Paul writing to the Corinthians] He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver ... Now he that ministereth seed to the sower both minister bread for your food, and multiply your seed sown, and increase the fruits of your righteousness; being enriched in every thing to all bountifulness, which causeth through us thanksgiving to God.

That is one application of the parable. Jesus could probably just have said that in the first place. God, knowing the sorts of trick questions that would be thrown at His followers or even asked by The Disciples who didn't always understand what Jesus was saying, made sure this question was answered in The Bible. It's quite a short discussion and it's recorded in the same three Gospels, here with Luke highlighted as before.

Luke 8:9-15; Matthew 13:10-13; Mark 4:10-20 And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be? And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand. Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection. But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.

Christians need to accept those are literally true accounts, of what Jesus said, of how He explained His words to the disciples, why He used parables at all and for that matter that Jesus actually existed in the first place. Otherwise, when scrubbing out selected sentences one may not like or chapters or whole books, what standard is available to choose which bits are "false" as such editors must hold them to be? There are other literary devices recorded too. Here's a reference you can look up that may be helpful in your reply. Thank you for contributing to the forum.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Could you be so kind to provide evidence for this statement?

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Could the boy be referring to the two mutually exclusive but literally true accounts of man's creation in the Book of Genesis?


If not, sounds like we've got another fanfic theologian on our hands.

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

You are absolutely — without question — 100% right here, dear Sister Handmaiden. The :lord-fancy: was able to manage Creation in seven days. Yet, the "intellectual" scientists argue against that, with their ridiculous statements about evolution that (supposedly) went on for trillions of years. And, yet, they still have no clue about how it all started. Even if there was a "big bang", what caused it? How did it come into existence? These things don't just happen on their own. But, in the blessed :kjv1611:, we know exactly how it all took place!

Genesis 2:2 "And on the seventh day :god-fancy: ended :his: work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all :his: work which he had made."

People should look around their living room, as an example. What do they see? A television set, perhaps. Maybe some nice furniture, and maybe some pictures on the walls. All of that had to be created in factories. It's not like all of a sudden, there was a loud noise and those objects just appeared out of thin air. And, I think that this photograph below, so very clearly, says so much about the reality of the situation, and show how very stupid the scientists are!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F6nPewDW...jpg&name=small

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

To say that the Human Race is here because of Chance is a tough one for thinking people to agree with. On the other hand it could be argued that each of us individually is a product of chance. Had that twinkle in Daddy's eye happened a day earlier or a day later each of us would have been dealt a different genetic shuffle

Re: A guide to the evolutionist conspiracy
 

Indeed. Evolution doesn't even pass the common sense test. If we came from monkeys, then why can't monkeys talk? Evolutionists can't explain this.

Maybe. But surely God would have given each of us the same soul. After all, the Lord put each of us on this planet for a reason, even morons such as Jason Brickall.