Apologetics

Hey readers,

This is a new page I started to post our apologetics debates and such so that they would not clutter the main blog page. To start things out, here's an amateur debate I had a year ago with another 15 year old guy named Toby. Toby’s profile information on the forum states that he is an “Aggressive Atheist." The debate started when Toby’s friend, Will, commented on my page to ask for prayer and help with his faith, and mentioned that Toby blasphemes God’s name and talks bad about religion. Toby commented on my page, offering to debate with me on the "existence of God." It's a long debate, it took almost a month.

Toby:

Yo Daniel,

I am willing to debate with you at any time the existence of God. Just write on my page if you want to, I'll post back to you asap.

However, this will not change my friendship with you and I completely respect your religion, I will also understand if you decline :)

Daniel:

Hey man, I'm fine with talking about it if you are. It's best if we both understand each other's sides, because really, we're talking about eternal issues and absolute truth here. Think about it: if there is no life after death, no God, no soul, then we both have no worries. We both live our lives and die. That's it. But if there IS life after death, then it's a different story: we both have to face an eternal, just Judge who will judge us based on the 10 commandments, the 10 basic moral laws for all men. This law is 'written' on our hearts; a 2 year old or a savage in South America both know it is wrong to lie or steal, just as much as a 30 year old, civilized man. We're all guilty of God's law, we all deserve to go to hell (God's place of punishment and separation from Him), and no one would be able to get to heaven unless God found a merciful, yet just, way to redeem us. This is why Jesus Christ came down to earth to sacrifice Himself as the ultimate sin offering. He paid the price for all our sins, even though He never committed a single one. He paid our fine! But we have the choice of either accepting or refusing this amazing offer, and sadly, many refuse it.

Sorry about how long that is, but that's pretty much the entire Gospel, or 'good news'.

Toby:

I believe when we die, there will be nothing but oblivion. However, if I do have to face a judging God, I'm sure he would judge me on my merits in life, and not my belief in him. who's to say it will be the Christian God anyway? It could be Allah, or Zeus, Thor or Apollo? Any of these God's could be "The One True God" so why pick Christianity?

I agree with most of the ten commandments anyway, apart from 1,2,3 and 4.

You mentioned how we all seem to have Morals no matter who we are. There is a logical reason behind this. Evolution has formed these morals over time. For example: A caveman learns that if he kills his friends he will have no one to help him hunt mammoth for food. Over time this idea has evolved so most humans do not murder, as humans work in packs.

You also mentioned Jesus Christ. I might be open to the idea of Jesus, yet there is no actual proof of his divinity. I agree - he was a great spiritual leader and he did exist. But was he the son of God? I don't think so.

I know you are very intelligent Daniel, yet you seem to believe in something with no real proof. Have a long think about why you actually believe it, and how you know it is true.

Daniel:

But you don't have any merits, Toby; nobody does. Do you think a good, just God would let a rebel who denied His very existence while he was on earth go? The other religions are idols made by men's hands; they are inventions, made by people who didn't want a righteous God who would expect His people to do the right thing. All the other world religions believe you can work your way to heaven, paradise or nirvana, whatever you wanna call it. Christianity is different: it recognizes that man is depraved and only God's mercy is enough to get us to eternal life. And sorry, but you can't pick and choose which commandments you like. If it's not wrong to, say, use God's name in vain, why is it wrong to murder? Lie? Steal? There is an absolute morality, and only Christianity answers those questions.

Also, about the evolutionary notion of morality, that's honestly bonkers. Humans don't think as groups; we think selfishly, it's part of our fallen nature. Why don't monkeys abstain from stealing and killing each other if it benefits the group to stay together? And if humans truly evolved morally, then why are we suddenly 'devolving'? Suddenly, homosexuality is considered ok, even though the Bible warns against it, and what happens? AIDS and ruined lives. The Law of God is a kindness, not a curse, it protects us.

What isn't enough proof of His divinity? Historically, almost all disease was wiped out in the Israel area during Christ's ministry of healing and miracles. Also, if Jesus was only a 'good teacher' and not God incarnate, then He was a liar, which is impossible if He's a 'good teacher' or the Son of God. He said, 'I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light. No one comes to the father except through Me' (John 14:6). Either Jesus was who he said He was, or He was a base liar, a fake. Based on His actions, I would say the former.

Why do I believe in God? That's about as ridiculous as asking why I believe in gravity, light or wind. There's a creation, there's a Creator.

Toby:

If God is so powerful then why is he so bothered with us? The God you worship is completely insecure - he needs worship and praise all the time. Isn't being big-headed a sin? Yet your God needs a constant reminder on how great he is.

You said that all other religions are idols.

So, can you tell me one good reason why Jehovah exists and Allah does not?

How do you know one is better than the other? How do you know one is a "false religion" yet the other is the true word of God?

Ask any scientist (Not a creationist scientist, a real scientist) Where morality comes from and they will say either human culture or human evolution.

We are not devolving, we are evolving at this very moment yet it will take millions of years to see any significant change.

You believe homosexuality to be a sin? This particular part of the bible is the biggest hypocrisy of them all. Your God is meant to be a loving God yet detests someone simply because of their sexual orientation. That is prejudice, and I believe it to be evil and just as bad as racism. And, you do know AIDS affects straight couples too? It is not solely from gay people.

I believe in Jesus, but he was not either a Lord, Liar or Lunatic. He was a great man, true. but he never performed any miracles. The men who wrote the bible made up half of it, so Jesus may be real but he did not perform any miracles.

Let me ask you a question.

Do you believe in Wizards, Witches and demons?

If you believe they do not exist, you are not a Christian. This is because in the bible God mentions Witches and wizards several times. (Which means, if the bible is true, they must exist) Jesus frequently casts out demons (Which means, if the Jesus was real, demons must be real as well.)

So do you believe in witches, wizards and demons? If you don't then your entire religions credibility falls apart.

Daniel:

The sole purpose of man was to worship God and ENJOY Him forever. Why does that make God 'big-headed'? And being 'big-headed' isn't a sin, pride is. Human pride. God can be proud without sinning (He created everything, didn't He?), because He's perfect and can't be hypocritical in His pride.

Because Allah was made up around 1500 years ago by a man called Muhammad who was a racist, polygamist, pedophile, and murderer, to name a few. Christianity is the oldest religion known to man; the oldest book we have, the book of Job, written in ancient Sumer (and it's historicity is backed up by other writings), is a book about a man being tormented by Satan, a fallen angel, and crying to God for help.

Everyone always tells me that there's no such thing as a 'real' scientist who's creationist, but there are literally 100's of PhD scientists who are biblical creationists. Look up answersingenesis.org.

Yes, homosexuality is a sin, a twisting of a man's (or woman's) natural instincts for something not natural. From an evolutionary standpoint, it's pointless; there's no evolutionary gain, only further mutations and debilitated people. From a pragmatic standpoint, it's harmful; it kills people. From a religious standpoint, it's wrong; IT KILLS PEOPLE, and is a corrupting of man's original design. The only reason people say it's 'sexual orientation' is because they are fired for saying it isn't; a scientist just recently got fired from a hospital for hinting that homosexuality isn't biologically innate in homosexuals. It's not politically correct these days to say it's wrong, it seems. And yes, I know heterosexual people get AIDs... from licentious sexual behavior, also condemned in the Bible. If every person married one spouse and never committed adultery for 1 generation, ALL STDs would be wiped out.

Yes, I believe in demons and 'mediums' (people who talk to the dead, also called wizards or witches). Demons are fallen angels, angels who followed Satan in his rebellion.

Toby:

Firstly, I disagree with all those things you said about Muhammed (PBUH). And, if you haven't noticed Jesus wasn't exactly the best guy in the world. He sinned many times. He was frequently drunk and ate too much (Gluttony) He talked about Pharisees in a extremely negative way, saying that their "inward part is full of ravening and wickedness." He referred to the Pharisees as "you fools," and "hypocrites." He also stole animals. Does this not say something about the credibility about your Prophet? Anyway, so if Allah is not the one true God, why not the Greek God Apollo?

Secondly, Christianity is in no way the oldest religion in the world. Judaism came way before Christianity. Before Judaism there was paganism and worship of spirits.

Many Creationist Scientists are not stupid. They may have PHDs and have gone to university. However, they are not stupid they are just ignorant of the facts. The facts are right there yet they choose to ignore them, something which I cannot understand.

Actually, Homosexuality is natural. Even some animals are homosexual! and animals ARE nature. It kills people? It would only kill them if they chose not to wear a condom - something which many straight couples choose not to do either.

People are born gay, it is not a choice. It has been scientifically proved that they are born gay. It cannot be "cured" either. How would you like it if someone discriminated you just because you were white? or just because you are American? You would think it is unfair to judge someone on something that you have no control over. Same thing with homosexuality!

You believe in Demons? Is there any proof for the existence of demons? and surely if they do exist, God must have created them as well.

Daniel:

Well, you can disagree with it all you want, but it's historical fact, unlike what you said about my Lord Jesus Christ... Muhammad frequently referred to black people as 'raisinheads', had many wives, some under the age of 13, and led many 'Jihads', or 'Holy Wars', for Islam, the religion he invented. What does 'PBUH' mean?

Where on EARTH did you get that Jesus was a glutton?? If you mean His first miracle of turning water into wine, the text makes no mention of Jesus even drinking any of it, and even if He did, that doesn't make him a drunkard; fermentation procedure back then made wine far less alcoholic than wine made by modern methods. Yes, He did say that about the Pharisees; they would load their own made-up laws on men (stuff as ridiculous as you can't spit on the road, because that would make mud, which is dirty and therefore 'unclean'), but at the same time told others that they didn't have to follow God's prescribed commandments. They were not only disobeying God's commandments themselves, but also teaching others to do the same, and calling it 'religion'. Jesus never stole anything, He only gave everything. If you mean stealing by driving out the merchants who were using Solomon's Temple as a marketplace, He never took anything, He simply drove them out. They were making profits on the sacrificial animals, running religion as a business. And, 'Christianity' is a term that was originally used to mock Christians; the word means 'little Christ'. It is actually true Judaism; people who still go by the name of Jew are people who refused Jesus as the Messiah and still think the Messiah is coming. Jesus fulfilled EVERY SINGLE PROPHECY about Him made in the Scriptures, about 500 years before He was even alive.

There is no fact for evolution available. It is historical science, which cannot be repeated or falsified. In other words, it is not repeatable in a lab or study, and therefore cannot be proven true or false. Creationism has the same problem, we just draw different conclusions from the exact same data. Radioactive dating cannot be reliable data; according to the best dating method, the shells on live snails was calculated to be 2 billion years old. On living snails. Plus the fact that within recent years, alive red blood cells were found in a T-Rex bone, which is impossible if it is over 65 million years old. Not to mention cave drawings of dinosaurs, indicating that man has had experience with them, backed up from the fact that dinosaurs are mentioned 3 times in the book of Job, just under a different name. The word 'dinosaur' hadn't been invented until the 1800s, while the King James translation of the Bible was finished in the 1600s.

Other than that flawed study of the penguins who got to be good buddies, I do not believe there has ever been any confirmed homosexual animal... But even if there was, what difference does that make? It's still disgusting; monkeys eat their poop, but does that mean humans should?

It is a choice. Every homosexual out there grew up as a boy or a girl, both mentally and physically; it was only after a life of licentious living did they decide to go for something 'new'. I know I sound harsh and flippant about it, but that's honestly how it is. Read Romans 1:24-32. Seriously, get out a Bible or go online and read it, it answers the question for you; you might as well know what you're arguing against.

No offense, but I have no operational proof of the existence of your brain, but I still know you have one because I can communicate rationally with you. Same with demons, and God for that matter. Demons (led by Satan) are what introduced sin to Adam, who willingly disobeyed God and brought sin into the world.

Toby, we both have arguments. It's gotta stop somewhere, and neither of us have gotten anywhere with each other. It was actually a very positive experience; most people I debate get very ugly and resort to foul language to get their point across. I'll leave this with the core of God's message:

We are all sinners; check yourself out if you don't believe it (I'm willing to bet you've lied, blasphemed, dishonored your parents, and stole something in your lifetime). Man is in a fallen state; we cannot return to God on our own, and someone has to pay that fine. Jesus came and lived a *SINLESS* life (if you don't believe that, show me one place in the Bible or any other historical text where Jesus definitely, beyond a doubt, committed a single sin). He bore our iniquities for us, and 'by His wounds we are healed' (see Isaiah 53). He paid our fine for breaking God's holy law. We can either choose to accept this offer, or try to pay it in this life with 'good deeds', and end up paying it in hell for eternity. Of course, we shouldn't use Jesus' blood as a Get-Out-of-Jail-Free card; our lives should reflect our gratitude to our Savior. I dunno about you, but before I was saved about two years ago, I know I was a wretch, a hopeless rebel. But God reached down and pulled me out of it, and I now live a life of service and (literally) eternal gratitude to God and His perfect saving grace and gift of repentance. I am persecuted almost wherever I go for this (I can't even remember how many times people have attacked me on this site alone for my faith), but it's worth it.

Please realize I am not pushing this on you. It is your life, and you're free to live it as you please. I am here as a watchman, to warn you about the wrath to come (Ezekiel 3:18-21). I am not being hateful in any way, and I hope you know that my only motive behind all this is because I care for you. It's like warning a blind man who is going to step off a cliff; it's your choice to ignore me, but I warned you.

Toby:

I've got some bible quotes where it shows Jesus sinned.

Luke 7:34

The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and you say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and "sinners."'

Stealing Animals

“Go to the village ahead of you. Right away you will find a donkey tied there, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them to me. If anyone says anything to you, you are to say, ‘The Lord needs them,’ and he will send them at once.”

I've got more, but I think I've made my point.

PBUH means Peace be Upon him.

Evolution has been observed. Super bug MRSA has evolved to become resistant to anti-biotics and scientists have observed it. Insects have evolved to become resistant to pesticides and scientists have observed this too.

Common Misconception about Radioactive dating. Scientists do not use only one method of radioactive dating. They use over 20! they compare these 20 different sets of data and this makes it MUCH more accurate. With over 20 kinds of dating, they can easily find out the average age of the earth which is 4.5 billion years.

Here is a list of animals which have been proven to display Homosexual behaviour.

Dog, Cat, Rat, Buffalo, Bear, Cat, Dolphin, Raccoon.

Are all these animals hated by God?

Homosexuality is not a choice! It has been scientifically proven that people are homosexual from birth.

Demons - If god created everything then surely he created demons as well? why would he do that?

I think “The Good News” is absurd. I'll never accept that an omnipotent being was forced to sacrifice anyone or anything in order to create a loophole in his own rules. I'll never accept that an ultimately benign entity can co-exist with Hell. And I'll never accept that humans are sinful, wicked creatures by default when we were allegedly made this way by an all-knowing creator.

I don't claim to be perfect, but I do try to live a good life. I take responsibility for my actions and don't need a scapegoat to save me from punishment. However, I do have to question the morality of a being who demands life-long worship when he won't even reveal himself, and threatens divine wrath if he is not obeyed.

I'd rather go to hell than spend eternity with the Christian God - a god who thinks it's ok to wipe out entire races, to kill millions of people for making the wrong choices, despite giving them free will, to judge people based on a simple and out-dated set of rules, and so on. Anyone who thinks that is the sort of being that deserves worship needs to seriously think about what they are promoting. To me it seems as crazy as worshipping Hitler, or any other evil being, human or 'supernatural'.

Daniel:

The 'gluttony' verse was Jesus' false accusers; it says in the Bible that the accusers' stories contradicted one another's. The 'stealing' verse isn't stealing; Jesus prophesied to the disciples that the owner would be nearby, and indeed this was the case. When the owner asked where they were going with his animal, they told him Jesus needed it, and he let them go willingly, and actually told them to hurry. No, you haven't made your point; Jesus was SINLESS. No question about it. On the other hand, Muhammad was far from sinless, and was a wicked man.

Those 'evolutions' are not bacterium evolving into birds or mushrooms evolving into people. They are adaptations within the species, or 'microevolution', which HAS been proven. 'Macroevolution', or evolution as it is normally called, is the *HYPOTHESIS* that all species evolved from one common ancestor, which has not been demonstrated and is scientifically impossible. Think about it; it took two scientists a long time to figure out how to make AMINO ACIDS, the basic makeup of proteins, and you think all the complexity on earth evolved from chance? Really?

No, homosexuals grow up 'straight' until they *DECIDE* to change their 'sexual orientation'. Show me one documented case where a guy acted like a female his ENTIRE LIFE, from birth, and is now homosexual today. Please do, I would like to know, but I am sure it would be all over the media and I sure haven't heard about it. I've only heard insistence based on no facts.

God created demons perfect, just like us. But we rebelled. Isn't that within our rights? Really, you would complain God was a tyrant for keeping us good; what's wrong with man's free choice? Man was created to be a free being, not a robot, and we chose sin and death over God's perfection. Our own mistake.

Toby, we're going nowhere with this. You claim you're good enough to go to heaven (if, you say, there even is such a place). That's impossible; it's like trying trying to buy a Ferrari with a dime, or pay a jail fine with a penny. It's impossible for us to ever measure to God's standard. We had the advantage; we could have chosen to stay perfect, but instead we rebelled, and like I said, it's our own fault. Humans are sinful; that's why there's evil in the world.

What will make you happy Toby?? Seriously?? What more can God do?? He's given you life, He's given you His wonderful creation as a sign of His existence (the same creation you give credit to evolution and chance), what more do you want?? If He appeared to you, you would attribute it to magic, if only to prove to yourself in your mind that He doesn't exist. 'The fool has said in his heart, There is no God' (Psalm 53:1). 'Although they have claimed to be wise, they have become fools' (Romans 1:22). You are foolish for ignoring God, and saying you would rather be damned than submit to a God who has every right to kill you right now.

Imagine a king who rules a kingdom, and a large group rebels. The rebellion is put down, and the rebels are in prison, awaiting execution for their treason. But the king has mercy on them, and even though he doesn't free all of them, he walks down Death Row and pardons every tenth man, and sets him free. Is that injust? No; the rebels sinned against him, and he has every right to punish them or free them as he pleases. But what about the other prisoners? They deserve punishment, and the king can execute them. But here's the thing; HE OFFERED PARDON TO EACH ONE OF THEM; only every tenth man believes that he did it, is forever grateful, and is set free. That's the same thing with God, Toby. He has every right to demand whatever he wants from His creation. He didn't need us to worship Him (He is self-sufficient), but He created us anyway.

Toby, I'm honestly wasting my time with you at this point. You claimed to be open-minded, but will not admit you are wrong on anything. I do not admit I am wrong on anything because 1. you have not offered any proof for what you have said, and 2. I base my beliefs on the oldest book in existence, written by men inspired by God. People don't die for a conspiracy, Toby. 500 disciples saw the risen Savior (and they had been present at His crucifixion), and every one of them died for not recanting their faith.

I prefer to keep my faith in the faith that has been preserved through the millennia, rather than the changing views invented by man. The Greek poet Homer invented the Gods in his poems, and the Greeks believed him. Where are the Greek gods now? Years ago, men believed the earth was flat (even though the Bible clearly says it is a sphere and hangs in space), but that was proven wrong. It is only a matter of time before evolution, a 150 year old hypothesis that has been changed and modified so many times it is almost indiscernible from the original, will pass away along with all the other myths of mankind.

All that to say, I am done arguing. No hard feelings though; I only argued with you about this because I care about you. Don't bother replying; just accept that we cannot agree, and let's put this behind us.

Toby:

Okay man. I understand how you feel, so this will be my last comment about this.

"You claimed to be open-minded, but will not admit you are wrong on anything. I do not admit I am wrong on anything because 1. you have not offered any proof for what you have said, and 2. I base my beliefs on the oldest book in existence, written by men inspired by God."

I'm sorry man, but I laughed a bit at that. You said that I have no proof for anything I said (Which I clearly did) You on the other hand, have no proof whatsoever. So why should I believe you?

I understand if you will always believe in God. But please, just investigate evolution. Just look at all the proof for it!

Protein functional redundancy, DNA functional redundancy, Transposons, Redundant pseudogenes, Endogenous retroviruses, Anatomical parahomology, Molecular parahomology, Anatomical convergence, Molecular convergence, Anatomical suboptimal function, Molecular suboptimal function, Nested hierarchies, Convergence of independent phylogenies, Transitional Forms, Anatomical Vestiges, Atavisms and Biogeography

Look up any of those things and you will find that each one is 100% solid evidence for evolution.

"No, homosexuals grow up 'straight' until they *DECIDE* to change their 'sexual orientation'. Show me one documented case where a guy acted like a female his ENTIRE LIFE, from birth, and is now homosexual today. Please do, I would like to know, but I am sure it would be all over the media and I sure haven't heard about it. I've only heard insistence based on no facts."

Your getting a bit confused here. Homosexuals are born homosexual, they do not know it yet though. Does a child of 8 years old ever have sexual feelings? of course not - they have not reached the correct age, they do not know about things like that. By the age of 13, most homosexuals know they are homosexual, and same thing with heterosexuals.

I'll leave it there. I've learnt a lot more about Christianity than I did before. I've debated many, many Christians and Creationists - and you are one of the better ones. I really do hope one day you will realise how your religion is false. I know this will probably never happen, but if it does talk to me.

in the mean time, you can pray for me all you like, but I think God has better things to worry about than me. Catastrophic famine and drought in Africa, for example, which could be better served by real, physical action, rather than speaking into the air for help.

Daniel:

I have studied extensively on evolution; I actually considered it seriously. But one quote from a evolutionary scientist (forget his name, sorry), and I'm paraphrasing here, but he said that if we took an unbiased person who had never heard or been indoctrinated about evolution ever in his life was introduced to the evidence and theory of evolution, he would tell you that you were crazy for believing it. The theory is, that 'in the beginning', there was nothing, but suddenly there was a big explosion of nothing and something came out (Big Bang). Then one little planet, billions of years later, appeared, cooled down, and oceans formed. Somehow, although water is a universal solvent but at the same time is needed for life (a Catch-22 for protein formation), a living creature was formed from non-living material. And we still haven't answered how everything can come from nothing! There's no 'proof' for either of our theories, only evidence, and I have found that creationism holds more evidence (historically, geologically and biologically) than evolution. Adaptations ARE NOT evolutions from species to species, they are simply adaptations. Big words don't scare me; I've read the evidence myself. In the end, there's only one, beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt proof that could ever definitively prove that evolution happened is by time travel back to the event. Even if scientists succeeded in evolving a gorilla into a human that still couldn't prove that it happened.

Well, every straight guy grows up feeling sexually like a rapist or perhaps a pedophile, but that's not right. Just because a guy's 'moral orientation' allows for murder or thieving doesn't make it ok. And that's if homosexuality is even natural, which it isn't; it's anti-evolutionary, contrary to your own worldview, and so far you've only made arguments for it based on emotions, which aren't scientific to say the least. Facts aren't formed by feelings.

I hope someday you realize you're trusting too much in yourself, but I hope God is gentle opening your eyes. I kind of laughed at that, too. Trust me, I am willing to die for my faith (not willing to KILL for it, however, as the Muslims you defend are); I don't give up that easy to a theory without anything behind it and is in most cases in contrast with evidence (since when do blood cells survive for 65 million years? And since when do scientists rebuild a 'missing link' model based on a couple of teeth and a femur?). If you really want to see what evidence we have, check out the 'Evolution Exposed' books. They go through the top three evolutionary textbooks for biology and geology used in high school, and point out the flaws with the claims in them. They are written by PhD, scientist authors, so no ignorance there.

I am always engaged in real, physical action. I assist at my local homeless shelter in Orlando, as well as support charities in India and a particularly poor family in India. Every weekend I go to a women's clinic in Orlando to minister and offer help to families there. But, from your point of view, how can saying words to the air do any harm? Certainly can't hurt ;) I'm praying to my personal God and Savior. What's wrong for calling my Dad once in a while to say hi and ask for help?

But anyway, talk to you later man. No hard feelings or anything; I think that was a pretty productive debate.

Toby:

"Adaptations ARE NOT evolutions from species to species, they are simply adaptations. "

But evolution does NOT mean "species to species". Evolution just means *CHANGE*. That adaptations can CAUSE species-to-species change depends only on the mechanism for evolution ... if that mechanism has no time limit ... if it is relentless ... the a lot of adaptations can produce a lot of change, including from species to species.

And what Darwin did was precisely that ... he showed that the mechanism that causes adaptation is RELENTLESS. That is natural selection. As long as individuals of a species are competing with each other for survival and reproduction, then they will *CHANGE*. Whether you call this change "adaptation" or "evolution" is utterly irrelevant. What you call a concept does not change what it IS and what it is capable of.

""In the end, there's only one, beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt proof that could ever definitively prove that evolution happened is by time travel back to the event. "

How do we know the sun is made of hydrogen then? We cannot visit the sun and bring back samples!

"not willing to KILL for it, however, as the Muslims you defend are"

Watch what your saying, man. You do realise there are 1.57 billion muslims in the world, and yet UNDER 2% of them are extremists?

Daniel:

All adaptations, whether you're talking about bacterial resistance to antibiotics or finches gaining beak size, have been shown to be a result of a loss of genetic information. In order to evolve to higher complexity, an organism requires MORE genetic information. Every single adaptation or mutation have been shown to be results of losses in information. So, in short: more information is required, but all observed adaptations are results of lost information.

But we can SEE the sun! We can measure it's heat, we can measure it's brightness! And honestly, we DON'T know it's only hydrogen! Who's to say it isn't some similar material?

I was talking about the Muslims you defend, such as Muhammad himself (you did say PBUH, after all). I have no problem with 'normal' Muslims, but so far as I know all known terrorists are Arabs, are Muslim, and their terrorist actions are usually influenced by their religion. It's a violent religion, Toby, and their own Koran (their holy book) states to kill infidels, the 'pigs' the Jews and the Christians especially.

Toby:

Genetic information grows by itself, as a result of mutation. Genetic changes happen apparently at random, all kinds of changes. Only those changes that enhance the survivability of the species will be more likely to be passed on to future generations. This drives a very slow (but steady) improvement of the species. For instance, as climate gets colder during an ice age, those individuals with thicker fur or more body fat have an advantage, so they will tend to have more offspring.

Micro evolution is a result of narrowing genetic information, not broadening it. Those mutations, random genetic changes, that don't help the species (which is the great majority of mutations) disappear.

Daniel:

That's the point. Those mutations sound great in theory, but they are missing, just as missing as the missing link. That's where evolution loses a lot of its credibility. I dunno if you know this, but a lot of 'creationists' don't believe in Creation or even a God at all; they just don't believe in evolution, because of problems like these. The ONLY mutations we have seen are losses in information; give me one example where a mutation occurred that resulted in a survivability advantage (I do agree with microevolutionary adaptation to climate and environment changes, they have been proven and observed), but at the SAME TIME resulted in an added feature or addition in the genetic code. I'll save you the time: they don't exist.

Toby:

Wait, i'm getting a bit confused here :S

What makes you think mutations are loss of information? Most are information neutral, like an A to T transformation. No information is lost. Others, like genetic integration of viral nucleotides, can add a great deal. Others, like non-blunt double strand breaks, often result in the addition of many nucleotides.

Random errors in cell division or repair mechanisms often result in the inclusion of novel genetic material.

Daniel:

Right, that's what I was trying to point out. In order for, say, a fish to gain legs to crawl up on land as an amphibian, there needs to be a genetic mutation/adaptation resulting in a gain of information to grow legs. If, on the other hand, a certain fish adapts to life in an underground cavern, since eyes are useless and are in fact a loss of energy to grow and maintain, the cave fish will lose their eyes. However, if the cave fish are reintroduced to a lighted environment, the eyes will not grow back, since the loss in information cannot be regained. That was my point. If all mutations we have so far observed in living organisms are either neutral or negative, then evolution by gradual genetic mutation and adaptation is impossible. If, on the other hand, it is shown that an organism can indeed evolve using positive genetic mutations, then the theory of biological evolution has all the more credibility. I'm not saying that more nucleotides can't be added to the strand; I'm talking about the information contained. You can add as many letters as you want to a book without giving it any more information, unless if you arrange the data in a logical sequence. It's the same way with DNA, we just haven't quite figured out the 'language' yet.

Toby:

I don't understand how what you are saying is evidence against evolution.

But I do know the 4 Irrefutable pieces of evidence for evolution.

1. The fossil record of change in earlier species

2.The chemical and anatomical similarities of related life forms

3. The geographic distribution of related species

4. The recorded genetic changes in living organisms over many generations.

Also, Evolution has been observed in the Doberman pinscher, which took just 35 years to become it's own species and not a hybrid.

99% of all species ever to have lived on this Earth are extinct. If God created life on Earth individually per species, what exactly would be the point of creating all these species, knowing they would have to die for mankind to advance? There have been five mass extinction events in world history. That means that God created up and wiped the slate clean five times before doing the current Creation. What exactly is the point? Why create dinosaurs, knowing you have to kill them to let humans ascend to power over Earth?

Also, You may be aware that Ray Comfort tried to debunk Evolution by using the common banana. He said the banana was perfectly designed to fit in the human hand, it had a colour code (Green not ripe, Yellow just right) and that this clearly shows God created the world. However, what Ray didn't know is that humans cultivated bananas and selectively bred them to the now so familiar form.

This was done through a process of artificial selection, which is something that is very closely related to natural selection, that integral part of evolution. So Comfort really, really shoots himself in the foot by trying to use bananas to disprove evolution.

Does this tell you something about the credibility of Creationists?

Daniel:

I'm not saying that mutations are evidence AGAINST evolution, I'm saying it certainly isn't evidence FOR evolution. According to the current theory, evolution requires positive mutations resulting in added information leading to more complex organism, and those mutations don't exist. That's my point.

Those are indeed evidences that might be used for evolution, but they can also be interpreted differently:

1. There is no 'missing links' or in-between-species (forget the exact term :S) fossils. If you're thinking about Archaeopteryx, that was a species of fully-developed bird with claws, no link there.

2. We are 80% water, but does that mean water is our ancestor? Watermelons are almost exactly the same as clouds, but are watermelons clouds? You can't draw any conclusions from chemical similarities. And indeed, we do share similar anatomies with primates, but this does not prove anything. Whales look like fish, but they're still mammals.

3. What exactly does that mean? I'm not sure what that has to do with evolution...

4. Yes, there is mutations, but that doesn't mean they're evolving! Mutations need more information for an organism to evolve! We see finches getting bigger or smaller beaks for different food types, but they're not changing from herbivorous finches into carnivorous hawks if their food is taken out of the environment; they would simply die out.

God created all things, but He didn't kill them off or 'wipe the slate clean'. He created all animals, but they died out as a result of environmental changes. For example, after the biblical, global flood (yes, ALL fossil evidence points to a global flood catastrophe), the environment would be so far changed that perhaps the dinosaurs could not survive. Species go extinct every day in the present, but no catastrophe is happening; the species' environments are simply changing to their disadvantage.

Also, about Ray Comfort (I'm glad you know about him, btw ;) ), he's no scientist and is a very bad generalization for all creationists; he is simply a fervent Christian. Yes, he believes in creation, but that doesn't make him a legitimate example.

But anyway, about his example, it was simply an example, nothing more. What, do you think he was trying to prove creationism by one example of a fruit?! That's absurd! It was just an example. And, as far as I know, wild bananas still look generally like the common banana you buy at the supermarket.

Toby:

1. There is no 'missing links' or in-between-species (forget the exact term :S) fossils. If you're thinking about Archaeopteryx, that was a species of fully-developed bird with claws, no link there.

Are you thinking of Transitional Fossils? Because there are an abundance of these. I can't list them all.

Check here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils

2. We are 80% water, but does that mean water is our ancestor? Watermelons are almost exactly the same as clouds, but are watermelons clouds? You can't draw any conclusions from chemical similarities. And indeed, we do share similar anatomies with primates, but this does not prove anything. Whales look like fish, but they're still mammals.

Evolution isn't proven by similarities, nor differences, but the pattern.

Look these links for further information

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Izl5BB2AkZE

3. What exactly does that mean? I'm not sure what that has to do with evolution...

Isolated areas and Islands often evolve their own animal and plant communities. For example; Before Humans arrived, Australia had more than 100 species of kangaroos, koalas, and other marsupials, but none of the more advanced terrestrial placental mammals such as cats, dogs, horses, or bears. Australia also had a great number of plant, insect, and bird species that were found nowhere else in the world. The reason for this? The most likely explanation for the existence of Australia's mostly unique biotic environments is that the life forms in these areas have been evolving in isolation from the rest of the world for millions of years.

4) Yes, there is mutations, but that doesn't mean they're evolving! Mutations need more information for an organism to evolve! We see finches getting bigger or smaller beaks for different food types, but they're not changing from herbivorous finches into carnivorous hawks if their food is taken out of the environment; they would simply die out.

Actually there is a lizard which changed. There is also evidence that suggests that the Panda has gone from carnivore to herbivore.

And mutations do increase information for an organism:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html

Daniel, you've got to realise that without evolution, 99% of Biology fails. I guarantee you will never find a Proper Biologist who denies evolution. There is a good reason for this - Biology just simply fails without it!

Consider this:

1. If god designed everything perfectly, how come there are genetic diseases and mutations?

2. if you believe in god, and believe he created heaven and earth, why don't you believe he could have created the process of evolution?

Daniel:

Thanks, that's the word I was looking for! ;) But, most 'transitional fossils' are either fakes or fully developed birds; I've looked into them.

To me, those patterns seem to indicate common design, not common ancestry. There's simply too much complexity and differences. We're not monkeys.

Oh, now I see what you mean... That's because, back when there was only one continent (Pangea, as it is usually called), the different creatures spread equally, but after the continent was divided (the Bible makes mention of the earth being divided) these different creatures were landlocked in their environments that they either adapted to or died out in. Natural selection is real, and is proven.

Another case of adaptation. The panda lives in a very barren environment, pretty much only populated by bamboo. So what if it moved from omnivorous to herbivorous? We have herbivorous humans (commonly known as vegetarians), but they're still humans.

Toby, you got to realize that evolution fails with biology! Darwin himself said, 'If there is one organ that is shown to take more than small, gradual changes to produce, my theory ultimately breaks down.' The human eye, the bombardier beetle, E. Coli bacteria, immune systems, and the giraffe circulatory system are all examples of that. I've already shown you that additive genetic mutations, just about the only hope for evolution, cannot happen.

God DID create everything perfect; that's why in old times it was ok to marry close relatives, because genetic mutations hadn't made it dangerous to do so yet. But after the Fall of Man, disease, sin, and death were all let in. Like I've been trying to tell you, it's our fault.

Because I believe His word. His word the Bible explicitly says He created the universe in 6, 24 hour days. If He's a perfect God, why would He lie about the origin of creation? The Bible and evolution are incompatible.

Toby:

Sorry I haven't replied in a while, I've been busy with Exams but now they are cancelled due to snow so it's all good :)

Transitional fossils of Birds are real. Why would scientists make fake fossils? they have nothing to gain by doing that and they would be found out quickly.

The human eye actually proves evolution is true:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhDWCujcFEY&feature=player_embedded

I don't know how the others disprove evolution. Care to expand?

Actually, Genetic mutations are not just down to marrying close relatives. Mutations result when the DNA polymerase makes a mistake, which happens about once every 100,000,000 bases. So sometimes it's just chance. Why would God punish someone who has just been born?

The bible says he created the world in 6 days. But why do you believe the bible? Revelation is symbolism, as most theologians agree on, so why can genesis not be symbolism? Jesus used parables, maybe God was using a kind of parable too? Besides, there is no proof for the garden of Eden, the great flood, or any of those other fairy tales. The great flood was stolen from the Sumerians. Just look at their story, and you can see how they are almost identical. In fact, a lot of the bible was stolen from older religions. Christianity is a direct copy of the Mithraic religion that was 200 years its predecessor. You can look in up in the Encyclopedia of World Religions. Mithra died for the sins of humanity, had 12 apostles, a last supper and most of the other tenets that Christianity copied.

Coincidence? I don't think so.

Daniel:

Sorry Toby, but the vertebrate eye has far too many interacting parts that would need to be evolved simultaneously in order to function. Why would a creature evolve a retina if there wasn't a lens, or a lens if there wasn't a retina, or a retina if there was cones and rods sensors? They would all have to be evolved at once. http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/11/28/news-to-note-11282009

Well, the others are just a chicken-egg problem for evolution. Which evolved first: the immune system, or the need for it? Obviously, the need for it came first, but wouldn't that wipe out the population before an immune system evolved? The bombardier beetle is another example. The bombardier beetle's self defense system is a spark and spray of flaming chemicals, pretty much a flame-throwing bug. Here's the problem with evolution: the bug would have to evolve the chemical sacs separately, because if the chemicals are put together inside the insect, the bug would explode. Each complex organ has something called 'irreducible complexity', which means if you remove one part in the system, the entire system wouldn't work. In the converse statement, this would mean that the system cannot be built one part at a time; it would be as if the genes were figuring out that they need an eye, so they say 'Let's build a retina, because we're gonna need that later when we build the lens'. If genes mutate randomly, and if mutations do NOT add to the code, then it doesn't work.

I was just using that as an example. The reason someone can't marry his sister is because chances are they share the same recessive mutation, and that trait would become apparent in the offspring. And God doesn't punish us with genetic mutations; you said yourself they happen by themselves, at random.

Many people have said that the Bible somehow steals from other religions, but think about this: if the large events in the Bible really happened in history, then we would expect to find legends of the events in all world cultures, right? That's exactly what we find; every culture has legends of the flood, creation, fall of man, everything. The Bible doesn't steal anything; it is simply restating the truth without all the legends and exaggerations people added. Also, Jesus only used parables to illustrate a truth He was trying to impart to His hearers; He never used a parable to describe a historic event. The Genesis account is just that, a historic event. You can't pick and choose what you think is right and true in the Bible; we have to believe it based on what it says, and so far nobody has found a contradiction in it. And here's a couple links refuting the common 'copycat' claim about Jesus:

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

http://www.Christian-thinktank.com/copycat.html

You're exactly right, it isn't a coincidence. The events in the Bible clearly happened, and cultures reflect that.

We've said time and time again that we're gonna stop arguing, but we haven't yet. Please just read what I said, reply if you want, but I won't reply. Feel free to ask me any question anytime about Christianity or its apologetics.

Cheers :)

Toby:

You claim to have studied Evolution extensively, yet you still believe in Irreducible Complexity? It seems the only type of Evolution you have studied is the pseudo-science of creationism.

Kenneth R. Miller, A biology professor, proved Irreducible Complexity wrong in the infamous Dover Court Case. (You might like to know, that Kenneth is a Catholic and believes whole-heartedly that evolution and God can co-exist)

Look at this link, and on the right hand side it has a picture of the evolution of the eye and which parts evolved first: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

"God doesn't punish us with genetic mutations; you said yourself they happen by themselves, at random."

What? I thought you said God did everything. So he must have caused the genetic mutation? Why should the child be punished for something he did not do? I don't understand what kind of twisted sadistic God would such a thing.

34,000 separate Christian groups have been identified in the world. If God is so powerful then why did he make the Bible so vague? This results in thousands of different Christian denominations. Which one is the right one, favoured by God?

Daniel:

http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/

Toby:

What am I meant to be looking at here?

Ray's pathetic attempt to turn his infamous banana blunder into a "joke"?

Blatent quotemining of both Albert Einstein and Richard Dawkins?

Or just his supreme lack of Scientific knowledge or credibility?

Daniel:

Just thought since so many atheists like Ray's blog, you might too. Other than name calling, you don't sound like you have much of an argument. But I'm not getting back into the debate, Toby; neither of us are getting anywhere with each other, but irreducible complexity does exist, it's simple logic; you don't need a PhD in biology to understand it. Didn't you read the top blog post on Ray's blog? He's no scientist, but that's his viewpoint on it.

Toby:

I agree, Ray comfort is a very funny man, albeit for the wrong reasons.

I just hate how some of his "facts" are taken so out of context.

Just look at this:

"AN ATHEIST IS SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES THE SCIENTIFIC IMPOSSIBLITY, NOTHING CREATED EVERYTHING"

I could easily say the same thing about Theists, because Theists believe that God has always existed - surely a scientific impossibility too?

How can you believe in Irreducible Complexity when it has been proved wrong?

That...that is true blind faith.

Daniel:

Well, isn't it true? An evolutionist/humanist/atheist believes that there is nothing supernatural in existence. 'Supernatural' is a term 'attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature' (dictionary on my computer). If nothing supernatural exists, however, then the Big Bang and evolution didn't happen, because something being created or produced by nothing and matter acting against the two Laws of Thermodynamics in evolution are both 'force(s) beyond... the laws of nature'. Therefore, one can conclude that atheists at once contradict themselves, the Bible, and logic itself.

God, on the other hand, IS supernatural; that's why atheists denied the existence of supernatural entities in the first place, their own name means they don't want to believe in God or gods. God existed for all eternity, eternity past and eternity future; He is not bound by our puny 'laws' of time and motion. He is outside of our 'dimension', so to speak. He existed for eternity before He created this universe, and He will continue to exist for eternity.

Irreducible complexity has been proven time and time again to be true. Think about it. If ONE of the interacting parts of any biological system, that system would stop functioning. Think of anything. Plant respiratory and energy systems. Immune systems. The (ever popular) human eye. Some complex organs simply cannot be evolved by gradual mutations. If the cave fish so readily adapts to lose its eyes, and cannot grow those eyes back (even though it used to have the genetic material and code for it), then how can an organism that never had the 'blueprints' for an eye in its genetic code evolve it from scratch, using small and gradual evolutions? Like I said, a retina is useless without a lens, and vice versa; the eye would have to be evolved all in one, which is pretty far from small and gradual.

Toby:

Oh, but Daniel.

I do believe in a God, in a way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

Daniel:

Your own profile says you're an 'Aggressive Atheist', and this whole debate was (originally) on the very existence of God. A deist believes "in the existence of a supreme being, specifically of a creator who does not intervene in the universe." (New Oxford American Dictionary) You now believe in a Creator who created the world, and then just left creation to fend for itself in a broken world it did nothing to deserve? That seems a lot more heartless and evil than the God of the Bible Who created all things perfect and cares enough about humanity to sacrifice Himself for our salvation.

Toby:

I suppose I am more of an Atheist than a Deist.

I am not 100% sure of either belief, and no one in the world is sure that what they think is completely true. I cannot make a commitment either way.

The problem with Atheism is that something must have created the universe. You can call this God, you could call it whatever you like. The "God" I believe does not think, it does not care about humanity. It is simply a force which created the universe. Anything could be this creator, but I highly doubt the Christian, Muslim or Jewish God is the creator.

I don't really worry about this kind of stuff anyway. I don't really care too much on who or what created the universe, as we will never find out the true answer until we die. The main thing I worry about is the negative effects of Religion, and disproving a PERSONAL (Not creational) God, which is much more important than worrying what created us and how we got here.

I know what I said makes next to no sense at all. Oh well.

Watch this video, I found it really interesting, I hope you will too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ

Daniel:

No, I understand man. You're just trying to figure stuff out, like absolute truth and God and stuff. I'm trying to help you figure it out.

But you do need to care about what happens after death. It isn't just a simple case of "Oh well, guess we'll find out", it's a matter of life and death, literally. You can't just go through life believing in a benign, impersonal entity, and then expect the holy, just Creator to let a rebel go free. It goes against His nature.

Think about this. You say no one can truly know if what they believe is true. You say there's no way to know this Creator entity, whether it's a He or an It. But here's the thing: It's an open book test! He's given us His Word, a collection of all the fulfilled prophecies and historic events throughout the ages, that holds the answers to all of life's questions. Sure, there's a few mysteries here and there, and we can't understand everything, or else we'd be like God Himself (it was the desire to be like God that tempted Adam to disobey Him). God set His Word in writing for ALL to read and understand, and He has preserved it throughout the ages, despite Man's best efforts to destroy it. The Bible is now illegal in over 41 countries, and has been almost stomped out of existence by persecution, but it still remains faithful to its original meaning, as shown by the ancient manuscripts such as the famous Dead Sea scrolls. Jesus' apostles were obviously sure of their faith; every one of them was executed for not denying the name of Christ.

All I'm trying to say is, check out the Bible, it holds all the answers. No seriously, read it. It's been around way longer than The Origin of Species, and it has stood the test of time. If you have a Bible, just start reading in the Gospel of John, fourth book in the New Testament.

Toby:

It does not matter what you believe in this lifetime. There is a simple reason why you should not fear Atheism.

"You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in god. If there is no god, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent god, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him."

See what I mean? It does not matter if you do not believe in a God, all that matters is if you are a good person in this life. The afterlife is irrelevant.

I am not glad the bible is illegal in so many countries. I am a firm believer in freedom, so taking away a book which should be a personal choice is detestable. I admire the bible, the language is often great, and the stories are gripping. (Yes I have read most of it)

However, some parts of the bible are Homophobic, Racist, Sexist, Scientifically Illiterate, and Contradictory. This is understandable because the bible was written by humans, and not by God.

"out of existence by persecution"

Oh man, don't pull the "persecution" card on me...

How can Christians say they are persecuted? Often they are doing the persecution themselves! Christians have just as much rights as everyone else.

An argument from Age means nothing. The oldest book in the world is "The Epic of Gilgamesh" But do you believe that? Of course not.

Daniel:

Let's try that in court. A serial rapist and murderer is brought before the judge, and he is proved to be guilty. The judge is about to pound his gavel and pronounce his sentence when the man leaps up and says, "Wait, Judge! I believe you're a good, forgiving Judge, and will forgive me for raping and murdering those women. Besides, I'm very sorry and I've always given my entire income to homeless shelters and healthcare in Africa." The Judge would probably say something like, "Yes, I am a good Judge, and because of my goodness and righteousness I will see that justice is served. Those are good acts, and you should be sorry, but that does not change the punishment for your wrongs." See, I could be the most humanitarian benefactor on the planet, but if I rob a bank I'm still going to jail. It's the same with the Final Judgement: "As it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many." (Hebrews 7:27-28).

Btw, I found out the number is actually over 52, but I am glad you believe in freedom. But not one of those claims you level against it is true. Racism: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28). Sexist, same verse. I have already proven to you many times that the Bible and science can be interpreted to support each other. And no one has ever proven the Bible to contradict itself anywhere. Indeed, homosexuality is wrong, but the Bible isn't scared of homosexuals (that's what homophobic means)! There is no evolutionary, pragmatic or religious reason to support homosexuality, and there is plenty of evolutionary, pragmatic and religious reasons why homosexuality is contrary to the furtherance of the human race.

Dude, I didn't say I'm being persecuted! I meant in the past, like the martyrdoms in Rome, and the persecution going on in the Middle East right now (those peaceful Muslims, you know).

Toby:

In your Court example, you have missed out a vital piece of information. A criminal's punishment is finite, whereas a sinner's punishment in hell is infinite.

Think about that. Infinity in Hell. Infinite Pain. No human mind can comprehend how amazingly horrific this is. Are you admitting that a loving God would send a Charitable, Loving Atheist to Hell FOR ETERNITY? This would truly be the biggest injustice ever.

Forgive me, I was mistaken about Racism in the bible.

However there is sexism:

"And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the w****, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire."

Would a man be burnt with fire for having sex? No, because women are inferior.

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Women are not allowed to speak in church yet men are? Sounds fair doesn't it?

"If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."

God allows slavery? what a nice loving God indeed.

The bible contains many scientific inaccuracies, proving it was not written by an all-knowing God. I won't list them all, but heres one.

"All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you."

No insects are four-legged. Not one.

About Islam - I agree I detest Islam more than Christianity. It is the most dangerous cult in the world at the moment and must be stopped before it is too late. Sadly, I think it is too late.

Daniel:

Yes, but you have done infinite amount of sins. That murderer and rapist should be put to death for such a horrible crime (I hope you agree with me on that score), but those are just two sins. You have sinned against an infinitely holy God, and deserve infinitely just punishment. Everyone deserves hell, including myself. You may have done many good things, but your bad works infinitely outweigh the good.

Also, about the priest's daughter example, the example is that a priest should have an orderly family, not a loose daughter. Moses' law not only called for the daughter's blood, but for the man's too. It was the 'religious' men of Jesus' day that would only call for the woman's blood, as in the case of the woman caught in adultery (John 8).

Also, men were only allowed to teach in church for the integrity of the church. They would be ridiculed for being taught by women. It is also a sign of creation; Adam was created first, then Eve as his 'help-meet' or companion. Men are designed to be stronger and the protector of the household, while women are designed to be loving and nurturing for the family at home. This is not sexism, it's just how it is.

Honestly, if men would follow the same laws God set forth for slavery, I would be pro-slavery. Why? Because God's law for 'slavery' actually wasn't slavery; it was more like a servant's contract. The servant would work for a salary, and would have to work for 7 years to be released on the year of Jubilee, but if he loved his master he could be allowed to stay with him for the rest of his life if the servant wished. The slave was protected under the law from his master as well, so the master couldn't hurt him. That doesn't sound so bad now, does it?

I agree, from a strictly scientific standpoint this is an error, but this could either be a translation error, or a generalization for all "bugs", or a euphemism for walking on all feet. That law wasn't exactly meant to be a textbook on insects, see.

Toby:

I do not agree with you. The murderer should not be put to death, he should be put in prison for a very very long time and rehabilitated. How could a pro life Christian support Capitol punishment? What happened to Judge Not Lest Ye Be Judged?

My only bad works are not believing in God? Is he really that bothered to give me eternity in a fiery hell just because I doubt his existence? So, Would you consider a Christian Murderer more moral than a Charitable Atheist? That makes no sense at all.

Is this Moses law still applicable today? Have you killed any priest's daughters recently? Why not?

I don't agree. There is nothing in women's genes that says women HAVE to stay home and there is nothing in men's genes that say they HAVE to be strong or protective. Think about this there are plenty of men who are weaker than women and less brave too. They are happy to be stay at home dads while women go and work for the family. There are also plenty of women who want to stay home. Its our social structure that makes this opinion somewhat true because that's how our society see it but that doesn't mean society is always right.

"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."

Slaves should submit to their masters even if their masters are harsh?

Definition of Slavery: the state of being under the control of another person

Does that sound like something a human being should be doing to another?

(There are many other scientific mistakes in the bible, this is not a one-off or translation error, besides, wouldn't God stop translation error?)

Don't you see how even a tiny mistake in the Bible results in the loss of it's credibility? If something claims to be written by God, then naturally you expect it to be perfect. extraordinary Claims require extraordinary evidence. Since the only evidence seems to be the Bible, and the bible is flawed, how can your claims be true?

Daniel:

Wow. You believe a serial rapist and murderer should just be sentenced to prison? Wow. That's pretty hard to believe. The logic behind God's law for murder is this: If you are willing to take another's life, you should be willing to give your own. I agree wholeheartedly with capital punishment, because a murderer is someone who has no respect for human life and is a danger to society. Think about it from a pragmatic or evolutionary standpoint, too, if you want to; if a member of a species is killing other members maliciously, the other members should take him out.

That's ludicrous. There's no such thing as a 'Christian Murderer,' because a true Christian CANNOT bring himself to murder!! Why? Because Christ said "If you love me you will keep my commandments". If a murderer claims to be a Christian, I call him a liar. A FORMER murderer can repent and turn his life around, though; Christ extends salvation to all men.

I'm not talking about society, Toby, and you're wrong, a woman's genes do make her weaker than a man; a man grows muscle much more easily with hormones like testosterone and adrenaline to keep him 'manly', while a woman naturally produces estrogen. Men and women are just built differently. I'm not saying women can't work; I'm saying men and women are obviously different, with men USUALLY, if not always, being the protector and defender and the woman being the nurturing mother. What's wrong with that anyway? We have roles.

That was written to Christian slaves being enslaved to pagan masters. Paul was telling them to take the persecution peacefully.

Definition of 'servant': "a person who performs duties for others, esp. a person employed in a house on domestic duties or as a personal attendant." This sounds a lot like Biblical slavery to me.

Toby, really, I laughed at that. You think a small, English euphemistic phrase could instantly prove the entire Bible wrong? Really? It was not written as an exhaustive scientific textbook; it is the Word of God.

Toby:

What?? Are you forgetting the commandment "Do not kill" or maybe the Sermon on the Mount? Maybe the fact that all vengeance is a bad thing?

How can that be when the bible commands murder of Homosexuals, Witches, Wizards, Adulters, Followers of Other Religions, False prophets, Women who are not Virgins on their wedding night, and People who work on the Sabbath?

Why should you worship a God which kills children?

"From there Elisha went up to Bethel. While he was on his way, some small boys came out of the city and jeered at him. "Go up baldhead," they shouted, "go up baldhead!" The prophet turned and saw them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two shebears came out of the woods and tore forty two of the children to pieces."

I know you will probably come up with some kind of obscure excuse for this. You've got to use Occam's razor. Which is the most likely answer? The most likely answer is God doesn't exist and this event does not happen. The least likely answer whatever obscure excuse you come up with.

Eh? God is meant to be all-knowing therefore if he gets anything wrong then he is clearly not all-knowing meaning most likely he doesn't exist!

Daniel:

No, of course not! That's why there is a capital punishment, to punish murderers! The command, 'Do not murder', condemns premeditated killing in cold blood. If you're willing to take someone's life, you should be willing to give your own. God's law is just.

God's people Israel were to be a holy people. They failed miserably, and disobeyed His law, which resulted in other nations rising up to take them down. When they returned to God and followed His law, He returned to their aid and freed them. This happened many times, such as the Babylonian captivity.

They weren't children according to the text, they were more like young men (teenagers), but anyway, bears kill people every year, but does that mean God is murdering them? No. Their death was the consequence for mocking God's prophet and God Himself.

No, these events did happen. God does exist, and His word is true. How can a sinner like me and you condemn God for anything, when we are guilty ourselves? God has never sinned; it is completely contrary to His nature.

Read this article, it explains it very well. It's by Ray Comfort, but don't mock, it makes sense.

http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2010/12/oh-wise-and-holy-christians.html

Toby:

I read the article link. quite interesting, though the comments below the article made a more persuasive arguement.

"No, these events did happen. God does exist, and His word is true."

Got any proof for that?

Daniel:

We've gone round and round in circles, but I'll say it again. There's a painting, there's a painter. There's a building, there's a builder. There's a creation, there's a Creator. Therefore, God exists. You've said yourself that atheism cannot answer how matter was created.

How do we know His word is true? This is shown by our innate sense of morality and justice; like I said, God's moral law, the Ten Commandments, are written on our hearts. Our souls agree and bear witness to His word. Besides that, it is completely against His nature to lie; He cannot bear the presence of ANY sin, whether in thought, word, or deed.

Titus 1:2 "...in hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began."

Hebrews 6:17-18 "Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us."

Psalm 18:30 "As for God, His way is perfect; The Word of the Lord is proven; He is a shield to all who trust in Him."

Prophecies in the Bible have also been proven to come true as well. For example, Isaiah prophesied of Cyrus king of Persia, who would send the Jews back to Jerusalem out of exile, 200 years before Cyrus was born:

Isaiah 45:13 "I will raise up Cyrus in my righteousness: I will make all his ways straight. He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free, but not for a price or reward, says the LORD Almighty.”

Jesus also prophesied of the fall of the great Solomon's Temple, and 70 years, the Romans destroyed and burned the gigantic temple. Isaiah prophesied of Jesus Himself (Isaiah 53).

Toby:

None of that is proof. This does not really prove a God. And even if it did prove a God it does not prove that God is a Christian God. 

Morality is the result of society, evolution and culture. No one has the same morals - For example Cannibal tribes in remote places eat each other and think it is okay. Is this because God has forsaken them? No, this is because they live somewhere remote, far away from the changing influence of a different society. There are many other examples of differing morals throughout the world.

This proves that Morality is not God given - It is simply a result of society. I know this seems pretty cold and harsh - but that's the way the universe works.

Anyone can make prophecies and predictions. In 1949 George Orwell predicted and described CCTV very accurately. Even more astounding - Mark Twain predicted the Internet in 1898! Do you worship Mark Twain or George Orwell? 

I think the main reason you believe in a God is because your mind wants you to think it is true. 

“Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand”

Karl Marx.

This has been a major trend throughout the history of the human race. Prehistoric people did not know the real cause of disease, so they blamed it on evil spirits. This is exactly the same thing which is going on today. People do not understand why we are here and what the purpose of life is, so they easily believe the lies of religion.

Daniel:

The existence of a creation proves there was a creating God. The Judeo-Christian God is the one who created the universe.

We've been through this. If morals change, then would it be ok for me to kill someone? No; it will always be wrong to kill someone. Why? Because, well, it's wrong. WHY? Because there's a moral law against it. It is possible to damage your nerves in your hands from touching a hot stove, and eventually you may not feel pain at all; same with someone's conscience. A child who is caught in a lie for the first time will start crying, even though he has no idea what society thinks about it. But if he grows up lying and gets away with it, eventually he won't have a problem with lying. It's the same with your example of the cannibal tribes; they know it's wrong, but if each individual continues to do it repeatedly they will 'sear' their conscience.

So, according to your definition of morality, it would be ok to kill you if we lived in a different society? I should hope not...

Predicting a universal network of information is one thing, prophesying a man by name and what he'd do 200 years before he lived is another.

Gotta love Marxist Communism...  <sarcasm> Wait. How do we know they blamed it on evil spirits if they lived in prehistoric times? :S If it was prehistoric, we have no written record of it.

But I'm not talking about diseases and evil spirits, I'm being logical. If there's a painting, there's a painter. There's a creation, there's a creator! That everything came from nothing and that living organisms evolved from nonliving chemicals is absurd, and only the Bible answers those questions. Quit acting like your 'science' explains everything, because it simply doesn't. The only thing we've ever observed evolving is science. It's always changing. Putting your faith in something that simply cannot work is blind faith.

Numbers might help my argument. It has been calculated that the chance of a 100-amino-acid protein assembling by random chance is 4.9 x 10 to the -191 power. In other words, 1 divided by 49 with 190 zeroes. It is accepted that any event with a probability beyond 1 x 10 to the -50 power is impossible (1 divided by a 1 with 50 zeroes). We must conclude mathematically that evolution, requiring thousands of times this amount of complexity, is impossible to occur.

So, if biological macroevolution and creation are the only two alternatives, and evolution is impossible, which does a logical human being pick? Creation. Which worldview contains a creation account? Biblical Judeo-Christianity. Where is this worldview contained? The Bible. Like I've said, the Bible is perfect, without error or contradiction, which would be impossible for a book written by many authors spread over multiple continents written over millennia... unless if it was inspired of God. I've already walked you through so many evidences for the Bible.

Toby:

" We must conclude mathematically that evolution, requiring thousands of times this amount of complexity, is impossible to occur."

Tell the fossils that? 

If morals change, then would it be ok for me to kill someone? No; it will always be wrong to kill someone. Why? Because, well, it's wrong. WHY? Because there's a moral law against it."

You seem to have misunderstood my point. My point was that in some societys and cultures it is perfectly acceptable to kill. In Sparta, in the time of the ancient Greeks, baby's who looked weak were left on the top of mountains to die. Me and you think this is awful. However the Spartans did not think this. So you see, Morality differs throughout time and place. There is no "set" morality, which every culture abides by - some cultures think killing is okay, some think it is wrong. Neither opinion is Correct - they are both different views.

 "Wait. How do we know they blamed it on evil spirits if they lived in prehistoric times? :S If it was prehistoric, we have no written record of it."

We know this because of several factors. First, they have left behind stone monuments depicting Spirits. Secondly, there is evidence of religious burial ceremonies, indicating they believed in the afterlife. Finally, We can study modern day tribes such as Aborigines and the Azande, who's customs have remained unchanged for thousands of years. These tribes use spiritual medicine to cure ailments and diseases.

"If there's a painting, there's a painter. There's a creation, there's a creator! "

That is not logical. It may seem logical on the surface, but you have to dig deeper. A Painting is a human creation. The universe is not a human creation! You cannot compare the two things - they are unconnected.

Daniel:

"Tell that to the fossils?"

I have, and they agree with me. Hemoglobin doesn't last in a T-Rex bone for 65 million years!

"Neither opinion is Correct - they are both different views."

So there's no absolutes? So it's ok for me to kill someone in this society, if my view is different? Leaving a baby to die is wrong, then and now. Whether they thought it was ok or not is irrelevant. It was wrong. You are trivializing the crime of murder. It will always be wrong to kill, regardless of what we think about it. Just because THEY thought it was ok didn't make it right! Your view is post-modern; a post-modern believes that the only absolute truth is that there is no absolute truth. It's an absurd notion that morality and truth changes.

Spiritual medicine doesn't work, so it's wrong. What's hard about that? There's no such thing as "spiritual medicine"; it's not mentioned anywhere in the Bible, and scientifically it's false!

Please. Seriously? I'm not saying the universe is a human creation, although there's far more chance for that than random chance creating it (humans are intelligent, yet we cannot create life, but you think Random Chance can?). Creation is God's creation, and you are taking His glory by attributing it to your god of Chance. You may call yourself an atheist or a deist or whatever, but at this point you seem to glorify Chance as the 'creator' of the universe. Do you see what you're doing? You turn your back on the possibility of a God, and yet raise up your own idol of Chance and pseudoscience to create everything from nothing and arrange it into the atoms and molecules that make up the universe. You're turning your back on the immense impossibility of it! Louis Pasteur disproved, once and for all, spontaneous generation, and yet your so-called scientists believe it to this day when they teach evolution! That's as ridiculous as believing the earth is flat in modern times.

Toby:

Scientists never found hemoglobin in a T Rex bone. They did find a bone that had been fossilized on the outside, but not on the inside. They also found what could be highly degraded remnants of hemoglobin, though the scientists also acknowledged that what they found could be a result of the fossilization or outside contamination. Scientists recovered hemoglobin from remains that have been dated as up to 300,000 years old - if dinosaur fossils were only 6000 years old, then finding hemoglobin (not just the highly degraded remains of it) would be much more common.

To not listen to this creationist propaganda. They claim evolution is lies, yet they are the true liars. Every piece of "evidence" creationism has is a lie.

"So there's no absolutes? So it's ok for me to kill someone in this society, if my view is different?"

There is a difference between fact and opinion.

Fact: There is murder/killing in the world.

Opinion: Killing is wrong

There is no moral law branded into us from birth. Everything you think is wrong or right is just your opinion, it does not matter if lots of people agree with you - it is still an opinion.

"Spiritual medicine doesn't work"

Spiritual medicine as in prayer? I should have clarified that. Obviously you believe in prayer. How come God doesn't answer one of the most Christian nations on the world (Africa) Prayers?

"Louis Pasteur disproved, once and for all, spontaneous generation, and yet your so-called scientists believe it to this day when they teach evolution!"

What are you on about, no scientist believes in spontaneous generation. That has nothing to do with evolution.

How about this - A man gets hit on the head and enters a vegetive state. He becomes mentally incapable of believing in God or Jesus. Does he go to heaven, even though he doesn't believe? If not, does he go to hell then? Both make no sense.

Daniel:

Don't YOU believe your evolutionist propaganda! Look at this link: 

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven

If morality is based on opinion and not fact, and if it is my opinion that I can be the next Hitler and kill 6 million people, would I right? After all, in my opinion, it's ok to do that. You are trivializing the crime of murder against God's creation, made in His own image. It doesn't matter what we think! It doesn't matter what a criminal thinks about the crime, he still goes to prison. You might say "society determines what's right", but God's "society" never changes, and His morality is absolute. Right now you sound more like a post-modern than ever before.

God has no requirement to answer prayers; He can choose what to do what He wants in His good will. It's like the story of Joseph in the Bible. Joseph's brothers sold him to slave traders who sold him to Potiphar, who made Joseph his house servant. Joseph was put in prison under false accusations, and was eventually taken out. Upon correctly explaining the Pharaoh's dream, he was made second in command in Egypt. Knowing that a 7 year famine was coming, he made all the Egyptians store 4/5 of their produce during the 7 years of plenty, and Egypt and the surrounding people lived off of it during the 7 years of famine. Joseph's brothers had to come and buy food, and Joseph revealed himself to them. They were terribly sorry, but Joseph told them that what they had meant for evil, God used for good.

Yes you do. At some point, nonliving material had to come together to become a living organism, simple though it be. That is called spontaneous generation.

About the vegetive man, that is a difficult question. If he repented and put his trust in the Savior before the accident, then he is a saved man and will go to heaven, regardless of his present mental state. It's like his mom and dad; they still love him and consider him their son even if he is in a coma. If he lived a life of sin and rebellion to God, then God's justice must be served.

God hates sin so much, that ONE LIE will send a person to hell, not to mention all the lies we've told and other sins we've committed! Jesus came to cover our sins and credit His righteousness to our account. He is not a "scapegoat". He is God Himself. He made the just and yet merciful way so that we as sinners can come back to God. You may call this a "loophole", but I call it profound mercy and love. That a perfect and holy God would love us dirty wretches so much to humiliate and sacrifice Himself for us! That He would offer us escape from our own depraved nature; that He would grant us eternal life worshipping Him. You cannot understand this joy until God opens your eyes, and I sincerely pray He will. As weird as this seems, Toby, God does love you. But He hates sin like we hate death, and someone must pay the penalty. You can either choose to pay yourself, or you can take Jesus' sacrifice. Please, consider eternity.

Toby:

There is no such thing as "Evolution Propaganda." Evolution is a scientific fact. It's like making propaganda for gravity. What would scientists gain by proving evolution? When Evolution was first discovered, there was a lot of opposition. But Darwin proved it with his masses of evidence. He did not necessarily "want" it to be true. He just found it was. Scientists cannot go on denying scientific fact - otherwise they would not be scientists!

I read the link. The part about "Does the Bible teach evolution?" was very good. I always though that Genesis could be considered symbolism. However, this does seem to tell a different story. So you either have to believe in Evolution or Genesis. Since Evolution has been proven to be true (95% of Scientists/Biologists believe in Evolution) Then it proves Genesis, and thus the existence of Judo/Christian God is denied.

The rest of it was Pseudo-Science. I could bet you a £100,000,000 that any qualified Biologist would refute all of that. Why not email that link to an established biologist and see what he/she makes of it? I also bet if you took that to a university as an established theory you would be laughed out the room. Why not ask for a second opinion (from a scientist) before blindly accepting things?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_proof.htm

Daniel:

Dude, I've already walked you through why evolution simply cannot happen! Darwin based his theory on the assumption that, based on beak changes in finches, a finch might eventually evolve into a hawk. And there is such thing as evolutionary propaganda; Archeoraptor, for example, was a fraudulent "missing link" constructed out of a large bird's body and a velociraptor's tail. Then there's "Piltdown Man" (http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/1124piltdown.asp), "Nebraska Man" (http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v13/i4/nebraska.asp), and Haekel's embryos (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n4/developing-deception), to name a few.

You talk as if species-to-species change, macro-evolution is proven science, but it isn't. It is historical science, something that cannot be repeated or falsified. Evolution needs to do a couple things to prove itself to me:

1. Prove how everything came from nothing.

2. Prove how random chemicals arranged themselves into amino acids, proteins, and structures.

3. Prove how life formed from nonliving material.

4. Prove how genetic mutations and natural processes can produce positive results in a species (in spite of the Second LAW of Thermodynamics).

5. Prove how the meteor that somehow wiped out the dinosaurs didn't wipe out all of life.

6. Prove why we do not observe any of the above things in modern times, even in a controlled lab.

Creationism explains the above thus:

1. Supernatural, eternal, perfect God created everything.

2. He created life.

3. He created life.

4. He created each species, and they have adapted via mutations into subspecies.

5. Dinosaurs were unable to fully adapt to the new atmosphere and environment after the Flood.

Only God can create life and everything out of nothing, so of course we cannot replicate creation.

Toby:

Evolution needs to do a couple things to prove itself to:

1. Prove how everything came from nothing.

2. Prove how random chemicals arranged themselves into amino acids, proteins, and structures.

3. Prove how life formed from nonliving material.

4. Prove how genetic mutations and natural processes can produce positive results in a species (in spite of the Second LAW of Thermodynamics).

5. Prove how the meteor that somehow wiped out the dinosaurs didn't wipe out all of life.

6. Prove why we do not observe any of the above things in modern times, even in a controlled lab.

1. What created God?

2. Lightening provided the catalyst to mix chemicals. Its been duplicated in labs.

3. The first living cells were formed from bacteria incased in membranes.

4. The second law is incorrectly applied to a closed system. Evolution is an open system.

5. Because Dinosaurs were at the very top of the food chain. A minor loss of life on its prey resulted in a major loss of food for the dinosaurs.

Actually, We have. A prime example of natural selection is the growing population of tuskless elephants. Considering elephants are being hunted for their tusks, tuskless elephants have developed an advantage in surviving and reproducing.

1) Piltdown man was a hoax - that doesn't mean that all fossils are hoaxes, just as one criminal does not mean that all people are bad.

2) The same may be said of Nebraska man I think.

A single point of evidence does not overturn a mountain of evidence - the argument would have to deal with the majority of the body of evidence not just one or two bad apples.

This argument about gill slits is very old and flawed - its sort of like picking on an old old man, its the mean spirited method of a bully. The idea led to much much better evidence. The primary evidence for life all coming from one origin now (including man and animals) is genomic and genetic evidence. Its pretty irrefutable.

Can better knowledge come from a flawed beginning? I would like to see an example of something that did not mature over time.

The early christians had many character flaws, that does not invalidate christianity in your eyes. (nor in mine), but then you cant turn around and prove something by cherry picking. this is essentially the method of the Salem Witch trials.

"Science is the search for truth - it is not a game in which one tries to beat his opponent"

- Linus Pauling.

The search for truth. This is how science works: Hypothesis, Experiment, Conclusion. They would have found Evolution to be false by this method if it was false. So, it's not some kind of war going on between Religion and Science. Science does not take in personal opinion. All science is is a vigorous study of facts.

Daniel:

1. God is supernatural and eternal, outside the laws of physics and this universe; He was not created by anything.

2. That experiment manufactured the opposite 'handed' amino acids required for proteins.

3. A bacteria is a living organism. How did the bacteria evolve from nonliving chemicals?

4. The total entropy (disorder) in the universe must either increase or remain at zero. Evolution requires some mechanism that increases the entropy of the rest of the universe and at the same time decrease the entropy of organisms, making them more complex.

5. I thought a major meteor impact killed most life on earth and the dinosaurs according to current theory?

6. That's natural selection/adaptation, by LOSS in genetic information! Natural selection and in-species adaptations have been observed; cross-species evolution and positive mutations HAVE NOT. We do not see elephants evolving into rhinos.

Every one of those hoaxes are still taught in school textbooks! If they're admittedly flawed, then they should be removed.

Which Christian had a character flaw??

"Science" means "knowledge". We can not prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that evolution OR creation happened, because it is a past event. We only have the present evidence to base our conclusions on. But even if we managed to evolve an ape into a man, that would not solve evolution's other problems, like the origin of matter, life's beginnings or the total improbability of the event. But you're acting contrary to your own quote: you've ignored the fact that the random formation of a simple protein is impossible, three times over. You've ignored the fact that everything cannot come from nothing. You've ignored the fact that life cannot spontaneously generate from nonliving chemicals. You've ignored the fact that genetic mutations within species are neutral or losses in information. You just don't want to bow the knee to God.

Toby:

Your argument is flawed. let me give an example.

A detective is investigating a murder case. he has a list of possible suspects. During his search, he finds the knife belongs to suspect A. He also finds out that Suspect B and suspect C has an alibi meaning it cannot be suspect B or C. Suspect A has a perfect motive, opportunity for attack and the weapon for the job. Fingerprints are found in the room the murder took place, which are identical to Suspect A. Every single bit of proof available points to Suspect A.

So, who do you think is the murderer?

Obviously, it's suspect A. However, by your logic, the detective was not at the scene of the crime so how can he know who was the murderer? So you see, just because we were not there, does not mean we know what happened. We can find things out via evidence, whether or not we were there. All possible evidence points to evolution, so why go for any other option?

I don't really understand this random protein formation thing you got going. But to me, it sounds like creationist pseudo-science. Like I've said many many times, ask a qualified biologist via email and ask him what he thinks of this argument. Why accept things without questioning them?

"Every one of those hoaxes are still taught in school textbooks!"

What are you on about? show me one recent biology textbook which has this in?

"Which Christians had a character flaw??"

Well, lets see.

The crusades? The Spanish inquisition? the slaughter of Jews? the selling of "indulgences"? the constant wars between protestants and Catholics?

Daniel:

Your argument is flawed as well. In the case of suspect A, we can have him standing right in front of us. We can talk to him. We know he exists. In the case of evolution vs. creationism, we have a knife, fingerprints, motive, and opportunity. We just don't know who the knife belongs to and whose fingerprints it is. We do not have Chance or God standing in front of us to prove it or He exists. We simply have the facts that matter does not come from nothing, etc, and that the evidence can be interpreted both ways in most cases, and in others can only be interpreted in favor of creation.

I was talking about the chance of random chemicals forming into a protein. My point is, if the formation of a random protein is impossible three times over, then the formation of many proteins into more complex structures is absurdly impossible. That was my point.

Holt, Prentice Hall and Glencoe high school biology textbooks.

Those were not "early" Christians. Anyway, the Crusades were run by the Catholics. You probably don't know much about them, but the Catholics had changed Christianity so much that it was a new religion, run by a man (the Pope) who they worshipped as God, not to mention their worship of the saints, Mary, and their works-based salvation. It was a new, pantheistic religion! So of course they messed up! The Spanish Inquisition was run by Catholics who didn't want Protestants to worship God the way the Bible said. I've never heard about the slaughter of Jews... Again, the selling of indulgences was a Catholic practice that was the final feather that broke the camel's back, so to speak; it encouraged Martin Luther to reform the church. Finally, the constant wars between the Catholics and Protestants was again brought about by the Catholics. St. Bartholomew's Eve massacre is a good example of this.