Why, if God is such a benevolent being, would he require his "son" to die for our "sins"?
According to Christianity, God bacame man, then committed suicide, in order to save his own creation from his own wrath.
Rather the long way around, isn't it?
Why, if God is such a benevolent being, would he require his "son" to die for our "sins"?
That must have taken a long time...good thing we got billions of years to fall back on
lol I am sorry he said that...
Committed suicide? what Bible verse is that?According to Christianity, God bacame man, then committed suicide, in order to save his own creation from his own wrath.
Rather the long way around, isn't it?
OK that one was taken out of context...sorry...How about the other?JF, are you basically denying that Darwin used a rhetorical device when he was talking about the incredulity of the construction of the eye by evolution - even though he clearly goes on to explain how it could work?
Committed suicide? what Bible verse is that?
lol I am sorry he said that...how about this one?
"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have devoted myself to a fantasy"
Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, 1887 Vol. 2, P.229
Why don't you explain tous all how humans are still evolving?
You seemed to have worked admirably on the species question; there could not have been a better plan than reading up on the opposite side. I rejoice profoundly that you intend admitting the doctrine of modification in your new edition;* nothing, I am convinced, could be more important for its success. I honour you most sincerely. To have maintained in the position of a master, one [Page 25] side of a question for thirty years, and then deliberately give it up, is a fact to which I much doubt whether the records of science offer a parallel. For myself, also, I rejoice profoundly; for, thinking of so many cases of men pursuing an illusion for years, often and often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a phantasy. Now I look at it as morally impossible that investigators of truth, like you and Hooker, can be wholly wrong, and therefore I rest in peace. Thank you for criticisms, which, if there be a second edition, I will attend to. I have been thinking that if I am much execrated as an atheist, etc., whether the admission of the doctrine of natural selection could injure your works; but I hope and think not, for as far as I can remember, the virulence of bigotry is expended on the first offender, and those who adopt his views are only pitied as deluded, by the wise and cheerful bigots.
OK that one was taken out of context...sorry...How about the other?
ok how about this one then? http://s8int.com/giants1.htmljf
did you even THINK about doing a little bit of research on Steve Quayle before giving us this link?
I suggest you type his name into google.
I'm affraid not!Also taken out of context.
I'm affraid not!
"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution we do not have one iota of fact." (Dr. T.N. Tahmisian. Atomic Energy Commission, The Fresno Bee, August 20, 1959
I'm affraid not!
lol I am sorry he said that...how about this one?
"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have devoted myself to a fantasy"
Charles Darwin, Life and Letters, 1887 Vol. 2, P.229
Is it an evolutionary miracle that that give or take a few percentage points humans reproduce at a 50% male to female ratio. How does evolution know to do something like this? Let me guess over a long period of time it figured it out for its self?
