No we dont. Thats just it. We share 96% similarity with chimp.

Is that a line from Monty Python?

Prove that this claim is unsubstantiated.



If that were the case, wouldn’t you have offered this information for us about 15 posts back?



The discrepancy is explained by apologetics as being a "later editorial insertion."



My world view includes none of this. I am taking the word of the apologetics in this case. They have offered a viable explanation to tell us why this contradiction exists.



Interesting you say "script" rather than "scripture." Also, I have heard from a few other Christians on forum that he DID in fact batize. Sigh.

I asked you to show proof that scientists are divided. I told you that it is quite possible for scientists to disagree on the precise meanings of their findings. This is an integral part of the formulation of scientific hypothesis and enables a workable theory to be created. I didn’t realize you were unclear on this process. Hopefully we can now move forward with no confusion.



Stating that the account of creation depicted in Genesis is factual or that it has supportive evidence is irrational unless you can prove otherwise.



Read my above statement CLEARLY.



This is true.




You have not offered anything for me to refute thus far.



Why not just use quotes.



If you have an opinion, you are quite free to state this position. I am also at liberty to dispute your claims. That is how an open debate forum works.



In other words, you are unwilling to read the thread and digest what has already been stated, yet you are perfectly willing to jump into the debate, post non related subject matter and arguments.



Okay.




I have NEVER met you. Stick to the facts here please.



Wonderful.

Read my last post.

Then why did they offer no rebuttal argument? That issue keeps getting glossed over. It doesn’t matter what you or I choose to personally accept now does it? Not in light of that fact.

That Gary guy brought it up and then you and Feral leaped on it like chimps at feeding time screeching.

Eljay most apologetics explain the passage by insisting the contradiction was caused by a later insertion. Anyone who is functionally literate can clearly see the discrepancy. The apologetics certainly did. As you wish. Believe what you want yet again in the face of stark reality.

If you are exempt from making rational statements based in logic and providing supportive evidence for your claims (other than scripture) then what do you want us to do about that if we are capable of this? It would be like me bringing out a Ferrari to race your 6 cylinder Honda Civic.



Really? It sounded more like you were attempting to create an argument. I am perfectly willing to listen to any new or additional information you can bring to the table at this point in time.



I don’t agree with this statement. The overall evolutionary sequence is extensively documented and no longer open to credible dispute. You would be fully aware of this if you had taken the time to read and digest about the past 3 pages of this thread.

That’s interesting. I have never once told you I was an Agnostic yet you immediately jump to this conclusion because I poo hoo the Christian god.



I have never asked any Christian on this forum for anything other than a logical rebuttal to the Theory of Evolution and support for the biblical account of Creation. Why should you be exempt from providing the exact same level of credible evidence that the proponents of biological evolution have been demonstrating on these threads?



Then why bother?



You guessed it.

Yep. They are unreliable but better than nothing. It is recommended that you use them in conjunction with another form of birth control. They are primarily there to protect against disease.

Also, when I was younger, I didn’t know that petroleum jelly {Vaseline} breaks down the latex. I’m sure many women can relate or have made that mistake before they were familiar with condoms.

Can you substantiate that premise? And since when are scientists not permitted to disagree on the results of their own findings? Isn’t that part of the scientific research method? You see Gary; unfortunately, we don’t have ONE book with all the answers for us wrapped up with a neat little contradictory bow.

Well honestly I feel that the Catholics are the "least removed" from the Pagans. In fact that’s not just my opinion. If you look online, there is plenty of historical evidence to support this. I also believe that is why the Protestants hate and fear the Catholics so much and are always attempting to "distance themselves" from them. Well of course the Catholics murdered the Protestants historically but it goes beyond that. The Protestants feel that the Catholics put FAR too much emphasis on the Virgin Mary and their rituals are all deeply entrenched in many pagan rites.

Especially Catholics. They do a lot of kneel, stand, sit back down, all through their rituals and Mass on Sundays.

MS these apologetics sites have zero credibility. They are Christians who sit there and try to defend the bible in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence. It’s pointless. However, you can always follow Eljay’s lead and find a dentist or two to argue the validity of Creationism. They went to dental school and such. Or maybe you can even dig up Kent Hovind although he’s in prison at the moment for some sort of tax evasion issue.

I guess he's a "fake Christian."

Where were all you bible thumpers back when abortion was outlawed in this country and women were forced underground to have the procedure in dark, unsanitary conditions at the hands of back alley butchers? We certainly didn’t hear you then screaming for the lives of these ADULT women did we? Although you will make a huge stink over a fetus. Illegal abortion was the number one killer of pregnant females during the period of time that it was outlawed.

That is irrelevant. You don’t have to be able to see while someone takes photos of you.

Jesus himself stated that most humans are bound for hell.