Imagine how much more convincing Christianity would be if the Bible said that we come from monke.

Imagine how much more convincing Christianity would be if the Bible said that we come from monke.

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Why would telling a lie make it more convincing?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Evolution has been proven.

      This was refuted ages ago and even among non specialists very few were ever fooled by this bs

      Evolution has never been refuted, it has been proven and the modern synthesis is the correct understanding of the diversity of life on earth.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Evolution has been proven.
        no it hasn't
        >Evolution has never been refuted
        this has been debunked
        go peddle your hindu nonsense somewhere else

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >no it hasn't
          Yes it has.
          >this has been debunked
          How has this been "debunked"? Evolution has been proven and the mechanism has been uncovered. We can directly genetically engineer animals and plants to create new phenotypes because we understand evolution and how it works. DNA makes RNA which translates to proteins. Mutations and selection cause variation and speciation. This has been proven.
          >go peddle your hindu nonsense somewhere else
          Lmao what the frick are you talking about

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Evolution comes from hindu theology and is based on the concept of reincarnation. It's hard to take you seriously when you don't even know your own beliefs

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Lmao no it doesn't. It comes from the direct observation of how genetics work as well as the direct observation of phenotypic changes in animals. It has nothing to do with Hinduism or reincarnation or any religion. It's an empirical fact.
            You have no idea what you're talking about

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            So where's all the evidence of creatures shapeshifting into other creatures?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            The entire fields of genetics, biology, and paleontology you moron.
            Also the fact that you use the term "shape-shifting" shows you're either genuinely moronic or you're just arguing in bad faith

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >arguing
            You're shilling your cults agenda and I'm just calmly destroying it. No need to get so defensive about it. Do you need a break so you can take some more hrt pills, get another booster shot?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >You're shilling your cults agenda
            Nope, I'm explaining why evolution has been proven via genetics
            >I'm just calmly destroying it
            You going "nuh uh it's fake!" Isn't destroying anything
            We can genetically engineer humans to have gills because the same genes which code for gills in fish exist in humans. This is because we both come from a common ancestor. This wouldn't be possible if evolution weren't true.
            >Do you need a break so you can take some more hrt pills, get another booster shot?
            Pathetic

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >We can genetically engineer humans to have gills because the same genes which code for gills in fish exist in humans. This is because we both come from a common ancestor. This wouldn't be possible if evolution weren't true.
            The Bible said this happened thousands of years ago, before the flood. All that proves is your commitment to perversions, not in this bogus theory of shapeshifting creatures that you use to justify it.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >The Bible said this happened thousands of years ago, before the flood
            No it doesn't. The bible also doesn't mention anything about humans evolving from common primate ancestors with other haplorhini primates.
            >All that proves is your commitment to perversions, not in this bogus theory of shapeshifting creatures that you use to justify it.
            Nope. It probes definitively that genetic mutation is what drives evolution and therefore proves evolution. You lost.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            There is no “shapeshifting” it’s not Pokémon.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          your children learn about it in school

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >inorganic matter turned into unintelligent organic matter
        >unintelligent organic matter turned into intelligent organic matter
        >proven
        lmao

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Organic matter just means "has carbon in it". You don't even know what the words your using mean.
          >unintelligent organic matter turned into intelligent organic matter
          Yes, this is how natural selection works. Having various advantages, like intelligence or speed or whatever, increases that matters chance of making more copies of itself.
          >proven
          Yes it has been proven.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            You conflated carbon with carbon based life forms.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Organic matter is matter with carbon in it. The anons exact sentence was "inorganic matter turned into unintelligent organic matter". Most organic matter is unintelligent, organic molecules,which are just molecules with carbon in them, are by far the most varied type of molecules because of carbons unique bonding qualities. There are more organic molecules than all inorganic compounds put together. The field of organic chemistry studies carbon based organic matter.
            But in terms of evolution, there is nothing stopping organic molecules or potentially any type of molecule from combining into larger structures and undergoing selection (evolution).

            Why does evolution being true make you so angry? I don't understand it. Evolution and biology are probably the most interesting thing in the world but it pisses you guys off for no reason.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            You need to posit a multiverse to account for the mathematical improbability of evolution being feasible in a universe with random physical laws. I'm not mad, you're probably projecting. Even if evolution was to be proven, which it hasn't, it would be a mechanism made possible and implemented by God to advance his creation. Why does God being true make you so angry? etc. etc.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Evolution has been proven by the genetic evidence. Phylogeny based on genetic affinity perfectly recapitulates morphological phylogeny. Inert genes like endogenous retroviruses preclude the "possibility" that genetic affinity is one big coincidence, just like the Book of Mormon must have directly copied the KJV because it includes not only Biblical text, but the KJV's idiosyncratic translation errors. How is this not literally proof of common descent?

            Also, the multiverse theory is the only explanation for quantum mechanics. But there is no way you can follow the arguments for this if you're too stupid to credit common descent.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Evolution has been proven by the genetic evidence
            No it hasn't. You haven't demonstrated how life sprang from non-life. Accounting for change isn't accounting for abiogenesis.
            And even if evolution is true, it wouldn't disprove God's existence.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >get btfo about evolution
            >move the goalposts to abiogenesis
            Every time.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Abiogenesis is not part and parcel of evolution. Abiogenesis is a theory for the origin of life for which we have no material evidence. Evolution is a theory for the origin of diversity, which has been proven by the genetic evidence. Another body of proof is the fossil evidence corroborating intermediate species predicted by taxonomists. Evolution predicts there must have been an ancestor to the birds closer than all living birds to reptiles, and we found Archaeopteryx. Evolution predicts there must have been an ancestor to all terrestrial vertebrates and closer than all of them to fish, and we found Tiktaalik. That is proof according to the dictionary. Tell me, what predictions can we make and test according to your differential theory of natural history? Evolution is also robustly supported by comparative embryology, morphology, vestigial anatomy, and atavism.
            >And even if evolution is true, it wouldn't disprove God's existence.
            Needless to say. I believe in a supreme being, I just conceive of it as far more transcendent than do creationists. But you can worship the God of Abraham and still affirm common descent, the Catholic church has explicitly said so, and the Episcopal Church has even outright supported theistic evolution.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Your own hubris led you to believe you reasoned for a God more transcendental than the God of the Bible, but it's your conception of Him that is flawed.

            >No it hasn't.
            The obvious empirical reality of DNA proves evolution.

            moron

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            How do you know that?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, you are a moron, and everyone laughs at you for it.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >Your own hubris led you to believe you reasoned for a God more transcendental than the God of the Bible, but it's your conception of Him that is flawed.
            The Biblical God is an anthropomorphic being who regrets, puts lying spirits in the mouths of false prophets, renders women sterile, loves the smell of burning flesh, etc. Please tell me how this being is actually more transcendent than an entirely apophatic supreme being.

            Actually, that's okay, never mind. Why don't we stick to evolution? Since I demonstrated that it has been proven and informed you that Christians can and do affirm it (which you may easily corroborate with Google) has your perspective changed?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >No it hasn't.
            The obvious empirical reality of DNA proves evolution.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      This was refuted ages ago and even among non specialists very few were ever fooled by this bs

      I'm sympathetic to YEC, but sadly there's an extremely crucial question that no YEC has ever been able to answer.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      /thread

      Evolution has been proven.
      [...]
      Evolution has never been refuted, it has been proven and the modern synthesis is the correct understanding of the diversity of life on earth.

      >Evolution has been debunked.*
      ftfy

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >Evolution has been debunked
        Well that's news to me, why don't you explain how?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >appeals to majority

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Did I say it's correct because most European people affirm it? No. But to me it is suggestive that the most well educated, highest mean IQ nations affirm common descent. I want to know what they don't know.

            A 2009 Pew poll of over 2,500 scientists found that 95% affirm evolution. I surmise biologists were even more univocal. It is not because of that fact that evolution is true, but it raises the question. How is it possible that the vast majority of people whose labor directly contributes to all of the technological innovation we see, far exceeding the imagination of the Biblical prophets, are much less capable than your average Turk of recognizing evolution is untrue?

            Just what are they missing Anon?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          simple, there is no evidence for it and what "evidence" is there is just a fabrication, like a piltdown man

          https://i.imgur.com/fBMlhF0.png

          Did I say it's correct because most European people affirm it? No. But to me it is suggestive that the most well educated, highest mean IQ nations affirm common descent. I want to know what they don't know.

          A 2009 Pew poll of over 2,500 scientists found that 95% affirm evolution. I surmise biologists were even more univocal. It is not because of that fact that evolution is true, but it raises the question. How is it possible that the vast majority of people whose labor directly contributes to all of the technological innovation we see, far exceeding the imagination of the Biblical prophets, are much less capable than your average Turk of recognizing evolution is untrue?

          Just what are they missing Anon?

          believing in evolution has no impact on any kind of technological inovation

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >there is no evidence for it and what "evidence" is there is just a fabrication
            Why even bother with this line? "Oh, I'm right, it's just that literally every biologist is in on a giant conspiracy". No matter what you're arguing about, save your breath if that's really the best you can do. moron

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This was refuted ages ago and even among non specialists very few were ever fooled by this bs

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It would be more convincing now, but it would have made the religion far less attractive during the 1st century

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >can you believe it, Blancus? those Christós cultists say that the ancestors of our ancestors were hairy man-like animals we see in the circus! *laughs so hard he spills his amphora*

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    The whole point of Christianity is to supress monke but at the same time they reject worldly knowledge in favour of belief.

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This is now a bible monke thread.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/bzMdumJ.jpeg

      Post a cardinal monke

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous
  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous
  9. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    if my grandmother had wheels she would have been a bike.

  10. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    If gebesis hit the mark even in the simplified way children’s science books are written it would be a serious case for Christianity. Of course it’s way off in exactly the way that ancient myths tend to be wrong.

  11. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    YHWH put ERVs inside animal genomes to deceive people into not believing in the bIble and sending themselves to eternal hellfire. He finds this very entertaining.

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Good morning sirs. Hinduism got close with the avatars of Vishnu

    >Fish - tortoise (amphibians, reptiles) - boar (early mammal) - lion man (less early mammal) - dwarf (monke, archaic hominin) - axe warrior (upper Paleolithic, Neolithic stone axes) - Lord Ram

    All the best sirs 🙂

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *