Modernism

>>2663311
ministers who preach calling things that aren't idols idols should be gassed

>>2663332
*tib *tib

>>2663311
Evolution is a fact though. You just look foolish to people who might otherwise take other elements of whatever your message is seriously.

File: 17-1.jpg (45KB, 400x402px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 400x402px

>>2663332
What would you call them, then? Icons?

>>2663350
But why do I look foolish?

God is realsies, evolution is not realz.
But realsies < feelies, what do now?

>>2663438
>ad hom
Opinion discarded.

>>2663422
>But why do I look foolish?

Because you deny something that is a settled fact. This doesn't just make you "look" foolish, it makes you a fool.

File: evolution-stereoview-crop-1600.jpg (1MB, 1600x1556px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1556px

>>2663464
>Because you deny something that is a settled fact. This doesn't just make you "look" foolish, it makes you a fool.
So healthy skepticism is foolish?

>>2663479
Your healthy skepticism is just irrational denial.

It always goes something like that:
Some guy says there isn't enough evidence for evolution even though it hasn't been denied in any way and things we actually managed to observe behave according to it (of course any evolution we actually observe is promptly prefixed with micro and then it gets stated that "macro evolution" never happened). Then the same guy points out to the bible and pretends it holds any shred of evidence even though the biblical theories have been flat out disproven (but those were just allegories!). And somehow showing up in debate with your only aim being pushing your ideologically driven nonsense you will never doubt involves some magical "healthy skepticism".

>>2663479

Nothing wrong with skepticism, but when a matter is proven to such an extent as evolution has been, then you're not being a skeptic but a reality-denier.

File: 1467137520725.jpg (354KB, 799x666px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 799x666px

>>2663552
>Some guy says there isn't enough evidence for evolution even though it hasn't been denied in any way and things we actually managed to observe behave according to it (of course any evolution we actually observe is promptly prefixed with micro and then it gets stated that "macro evolution" never happened).
What is institutional bias? You only say it hasn't been disproven because that's all you know. Circular reasoning is circular reasoning.

>Then the same guy points out to the bible and pretends it holds any shred of evidence even though the biblical theories have been flat out disproven (but those were just allegories!).
Perfectly states what it needs to. Anyone who says it is allegory is a heretic.

>And somehow showing up in debate with your only aim being pushing your ideologically driven nonsense you will never doubt involves some magical "healthy skepticism".
My goal is to open people's eyes.

>>2663602
>What is institutional bias? You only say it hasn't been disproven because that's all you know. Circular reasoning is circular reasoning.
So when has it been disproven? Are you Lysenko?

And where is the working theory that is actually true and can be used by biologist with great success?

File: document-55.png (193KB, 680x510px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 680x510px

>>2663590
>Nothing wrong with skepticism, but when a matter is proven to such an extent as evolution has been, then you're not being a skeptic but a reality-denier.
So anything that dares go against this doctrine, complete with "just-so" stories, is a hazard to the idea? Sounds like a cult of some sort.

threads like this are why we need /rel/

File: 1466573723976.jpg (57KB, 526x240px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 526x240px

>>2663616
Common creator. Common ancestor requires multiple beneficial mutations to occur, when only neutral or detrimental ones have been observed, and anyone who claims this is written off as a quack. Also, you fail to take into account the moral consequences of such ideas.

>>2663619
So like Christianity? Remind me what parts are allegory and what parts true? You decry that evolutionists stick to their theory while jumping your contradictory and at times blatantly false bible (like that time the news spent in Egypt that never happened)

Dumb fucking nigger just like the rest of Christianity (now mostly a shitskin religion)

>>2663653
So what does common creator tell biologists? So far they base their work off evolution and there aren't successful biologists that use creationism.

File: evolution-race.jpg (70KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 960x720px

>>2663665
>So like Christianity? Remind me what parts are allegory and what parts true? You decry that evolutionists stick to their theory while jumping your contradictory and at times blatantly false bible (like that time the news spent in Egypt that never happened)
All true, no allegory.

>Dumb fucking nigger just like the rest of Christianity (now mostly a shitskin religion)
Further proof evolution makes people racist.

"And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;" -Acts 17:26
Common designer means a common purpose, and equality.

>>2663674
Todd Wood

>>2663464
>settled fact
It's meaningless trivia that has no bearing on human existence other than to serve as "scientific" justification for men to live and act like beasts.

>>2663311

1. I'm pretty sure evolutionists don't worship monkies.

2. There is nothing in the Bible that explicitly says Adam was homo sapiens. Just he was made in God's image. Never said it was modern mans.

>>2663653
What? How do you even determine positive/neutral mutations when we've only been observing this shit for roughly 100 years? These things require a long time with multiple stressors before you could possibly conclude whether a mutation was merely neutral or positive.

File: 20120120.gif (45KB, 290x349px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 290x349px

>>2664336

>>2664351
So, basically, you can't prove macroevolution with genetics? Thought so.

>>2664360

Are you saying God isn't powerful or intelligent enough to make man through evolution?

I'm pretty sure the Bible did not say "God snapped his fingers and man popped out of his ass!"

>It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.
Augustine of Hippo, The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1:19–20, Chapt. 19 [AD 408]

Even Ancient Christians knew what was up with literal interpretation.

File: Origins.jpg (265KB, 415x634px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 415x634px

>>2664374
>I'm pretty sure the Bible did not say "God snapped his fingers and man popped out of his ass!"

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
- Genesis 1: 26-27, 2:7

Augustine believed creation happened instantaneously, but was organized as seven days for allegorical purposes.

>>2663828
LMAO SHOW ME ONE PIECE OF ARCHEALOGICAL EVIDENCE SUPPORTING EXODUS

>EGYPTIANS NONE
>GREEK NONE
>SURROUNDING CIVS NONE
>JEWS OH YRAH TOTALLY TRUE GOYS NOT LIKE WE'VE EVER LIED OR MADE SHIT UP

TOTAL KEKS YOU CHRISTIANITY DESTROYING THE WEST AGAIN WITH YOUR FAGGOTRY

File: 1466752334433.jpg (72KB, 600x616px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 600x616px

>>2664393

He never said man was the same then then they are now.

Honestly I don't know what that other guy was about saying Macro evolution is too slow to see evolution in man. You can literally tell slight differences in humans that were born in the 1800s in and in paintings.

Some of that is health related, but certain mutations like autism crept in to the populace in more recent times.

>>2664374
I'm personally not Christian, but something I've always thought is that if the Bible truly is inspired by the word of God, it's very likely that God told ancient humans some things that they didn't understand very well yet, so we get weird or abstract passages that may not literally mean what we interpret the words to mean. The book is full of symbolism and parables already, so it's not really a stretch, IMO.

File: 1463802828822.gif (2MB, 300x333px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x333px

>>2664405

Oh yeah. Women's breast size has dramatically increased since the 1970's.

File: evolved-from-stupid.jpg (168KB, 500x418px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 500x418px

>>2664405
>He never said man was the same then then they are now.
God is divine, we were made by God to be his image-bearers, ergo we'd have to be in the best possible condition (""""modern"""") to do so properly. Other supposed species of man are merely the result of either inbreeding, malnutrition, or pathological features.

>Honestly I don't know what that other guy was about saying Macro evolution is too slow to see evolution in man. You can literally tell slight differences in humans that were born in the 1800s in and in paintings.
Micro, not macro. Man degrading in structure=/=monkey-to-man.

>>2664437

If we are divine why are some people ugly and or have genetic birth defects making them really fugly.

>>2664453
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." -Romans 5:12

>>2664411
so has fatty diets

File: 181.gif (78KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 300x100px

>>2664467

Oh fuck it. I was going to reply seriously to your question, but where is the goddamn firmament?

Where the fuck is it?

>>2664493
https://answersingenesis.org/contradictions-in-the-bible/underneath-a-solid-sky/

File: 1935218_896450067133849_8510899774655810346_n.jpg (39KB, 349x395px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 349x395px

>>2664499
>https://answersingenesis.org/contradictions-in-the-bible/underneath-a-solid-sky/

Oh hold up. So the Jews who wrote the Bible didn't know what the fuck they were talking about and English people had to re-translate their own fucking words to match reality?

It was fucking clear for over a 2000 years what the fucking Hebrew text meant.

You can't just say oh but the ancients were wrong by translating it for them. Otherwise you cannot take the Bible literally.

>>2664508
Fallible humans, infallible text.

I remember when you used to plague /twg/

>>2664518
>infalliable text
>collated by humans by order of a particular ruler of an empire.

>>2664320

They were doing that just fine on their own before Darwin.

File: 12322695_890781447700711_7588050022932083563_o.jpg (259KB, 2048x1064px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 2048x1064px

>>2664518

Lol. That taking trolling to a new level.

Which text is right?

At least Muslims got their shit together and agreed never to translate their book.

Seriously even the Jews teach their children Hebrew so they can read it in the original language.

You cannot change the meaning of words through mistranslation and still be faithful follower of your religion.

Its like you get to pick and chose what usury means?

>Oh it just means no interest over 40%

When it clearly meant no interest whatsover!

File: 41nRw4bkE7L._SX367_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (28KB, 369x499px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 369x499px

>>2664531
Interlinear m80.