Creationism vs Evolution, Equal?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Chris T

No, but he seems to think that the fact that people do those things 'clarifies' the entrance requirements. I'm not sure what else he means by that, seeing as he doesn't appear to be considering Jesus at the same time.

Well, he doesn't have much space to say his piece, that was actually quite a lot for him.
Russ has on many occasions only mentioned one of the "rules" to be a christian, yet that does not mean he is claiming that just following that one "rule" makes you a christian is he?

Originally Posted by Chris T

Are we way off topic yet?

Very, bad CF team members

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ B

No - I don't have a view on it, I've never considered it.

Our very own Russ. An Agnostic

[Russ]

In yer dreams

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

Yes it would. But you could point out where he's not quite got it right?

Afraid its against forum policy for me to do that, I've just tried.
Guess you'll just have to stick to using some intelligence.

Originally Posted by Russ B

Biblical heaven? I don't know of any beliefs which states that just by being human is the entry requirement.

I've no idea what all the beliefs you know of on how to enter heaven.

Originally Posted by Russ B

No - I don't have a view on it, I've never considered it.

So you believe that humans don't evolve, animals do, neandethals are related to humans so they too would have to be decendants of Adam but you've never wondered why you believed this?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Afraid its against forum policy for me to do that, I've just tried.

Would you like me to amend your sig for you?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

So you believe that humans don't evolve, animals do, neandethals are related to humans so they too would have to be decendants of Adam but you've never wondered why you believed this?

I'm not convinced neanderthals are an offshoot of humans. Related of course but I don't agree they are close enough to subject to the same laws. I'd be more inclined to believe God created them and gave them their natural lifespan, a short term version of apes so to speak.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

Would you like me to amend your sig for you?

If I trusted you, I'd have no problem with that, but I don't, so I'd rather you kept your hands to yourself.
Besides, applying your intelligence to the quote shouldn't be an issue should it?

Originally Posted by Russ B

I'm not convinced neanderthals are an offshoot of humans. Related of course but I don't agree they are close enough to subject to the same laws. I'd be more inclined to believe God created them and gave them their natural lifespan, a short term version of apes so to speak.

If they're related, they must have a common ancester.
If the ancester of humans is Adam, then he too must be the ancester of neandethals.

I have to agree with regards to neandethals being an offshoot of humans, although I don't believe evolutionist think they're an offshoot either, more, as I said above in relation to the belief you shared with us, they had a common ancester. (your belief that you shared with us being that they are related)

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

If I trusted you, I'd have no problem with that, but I don't, so I'd rather you kept your hands to yourself.
Besides, applying your intelligence to the quote shouldn't be an issue should it?

All I'm proposing to do is put 'Some' at the start and refer it it as the 'amended' Meditation. The problem with it at the moment is people might think it's correct.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

If they're related, they must have a joint ancester.
If the ancester of humans is Adam, then he too must be the ancester of neandethals.

Again, that's going on human rules. You know fully well that I believe God's creation are subject to his rules, not ours.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

All I'm proposing to do is put 'Some' at the start and refer it it as the 'amended' Meditation.

That's nice Russ, but still would rather you don't go near it.
It's a direct quote, modifying it would be putting words into someone else's mouth, and you've mentioned that you never like doing that or having it done to you.

I know mistakes can be made (and by that I mean honest mistakes and accidents) when modifying people's account details, it happens all over the net every day.

It would also mean going through everyone's sigs and modifying them all, which I doubt anyone would thank you for, nor would I expect you to do that, not even for some of the obvious online petition sigs that I've seen.

Originally Posted by Russ B

Again, that's going on human rules. You know fully well that I believe God's creation are subject to his rules, not ours.

So an animal can be related to a human (and we're not talking about the Maine way here!), but not have any biological links?
Could you explain what you base that belief on?

I thought it was your god's rule that an animal can only give birth do another animal of the same species?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

So an animal can be related to a human (and we're not talking about the Maine way here!), but not have any biological links?

I'm not saying I think neanderthals are animals!

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

I'm not saying I think neanderthals are animals!

Ah that helps
Could you please give us the Russ B explaination of the origin of neandethals?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Ah that helps
Could you please give us the Russ B explaination of the origin of neandethals?

There isn't one - as I've said before I've never spent much time worrying about it, and neither should I need to!

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

There isn't one - as I've said before I've never spent much time worrying about it, and neither should I need to!

I wonder if my feeling of religious people not questioning things because god is a satisfactory answer to them is similar to your feeling of non-religious people not accepting god as a satisfactory answer?

[handyman]

So If neanderthals are not animals but look like humans then that means they must be humans or that humans are descendant from them. After all that would seem to be the only sane solution one could come to.

"All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one."

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

I wonder if my feeling of religious people not questioning things because god is a satisfactory answer to them is similar to your feeling of non-religious people not accepting god as a satisfactory answer?

Whether or not that's true, my position is that as long as one person's view doesn't encroach on another's then live and let live - without the petty insults, digs and attempts to change the others' way of thinking. However there is plenty I don't question, simply because I see no need to and don't want to waste my time.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

without the petty insults, digs and attempts to change the others' way of thinking.

Yes, remember that