Please explain further why a several million year old upright walking ape is not a suitable example of "the missing link".
The only missing links available today are the results of intentional and unintentional confusion of data and lack of data. For example, the usual case is when human and ape-like bones are found in the vicinity of one another (true ape-men) and are mixed together thinking they lived together. Another is when a human skeleton is downscaled to de-emphasize a human quality or an ape skeleton is upscaled to emphasize a particular human quality. Having 100% of the skeletal remains is not the usual case, so extrapolation takes place with the artist's (scientist's) assumed results. Not to reiterate too much, but you really out to check out how Lovejoy doctored up Lucy's pelvis to make it look human because he thought that it MUST have left those footprints in Laetoli, Tanzania. Some of these models on display are not showing the true skeleton, either. I recall the Lucy Australopithecus afarensis on display in St. Louis intentionally show with human hands and feet even though they were not the hands and feet that were found with it. This doctoring up of remains has left confusion with the general public. Hominid (known ancestor or colateral relative of man, or man himself) evolution is data-poor and imagination-rich. Lucy was the best example of a hominid with only 40% of the skeletal remains and turned out to a big fraud. This type of scientific work is a great way for scientists to get funding and propagate an ideology but is not hard evidence at all.
Explain to me why when something good happens its a miracle or a gift from god, but when the holocaust happens its mans evil doings...
The sun rises on the evil and the good and the rain falls on both, too. When you take two kids and put them in a room full of toys, eventually, they'll start fighting over the same toy. It's in man's nature to do something wicked. We all know how, but living a pure life seems impossible. I think we all agree. When God puts His spirit inside someone, that person then has a second nature that competes with the old human nature. The two natures are at war with each other,... one to be selfish and destructive and the other that wants to please God. If God grants a miracle to someone and that person gives God that credit. That's great and they call it a miracle. Sometimes it happens when we don't even ask! When man allows himself to be controlled by the human nature (in the example of Hitler wanting to rid the world of Jew), man does not want to show love and selflessness, but rather wants to fulfill his own. In the case with Hitler, he wanted to be a powerful ruler and wanted all Jews dead. Christ says that you will know His followers by their love for others (not hatred). I don't see how anyone could attribute Hitler's work as love for anyone.
Also do you accept the fact that the earth is several billion years old? Which as a physicist I would find it hard to believe you don't you work within the world of rules, laws, and science. If so why would god wait 4.29 billion years to create man after creating the planet...
I believe the earth is about 8-10k years old, not billions. One cool thing about fossil records is that they don't require thousands of years, but can form much, much faster. There are some that believe in a "gap" theory in Genesis thinking that God did wait before completing the rest of creation. I don't believe this, though. I belive it occurred in a more rapid succession of events. The work that was completed was made to appear to be older than it was, though. Here's food for though: if the evolutionist believes in an expanding universe, it would stand to reason that galaxies that are on the outer fringe of the expansion would have a greater radius of curvature demonstrating its older age since it's origin. However, we see some galaxies further from the expected "center" that have a tighter curvature, suggesting they are also younger, which completely contradicts many theories about the expanding unviverse. Also, how did the dinosaurs die? You know, the explanation has been changed several times by evolutionists over recent decades. Here's the answer: they died in the flood described in the bible. The flood also explains the Grand Canyon, some work by Russian (athesists) scientists that found water from the Mediterranean Sea in the Black Sea and concluded that there MUST have been a world-wide flood, and it also explains why I found sea shells in the Daniel Boone National Forest (in the middle of nowhere!).
How do you explain evolution, how can you possibly reject it as a fact? People are evolving right now you can catalog it from parent to child, you cant rationally explain to me that evolution is not existent? If you want to reject the fact that we shared a common ancestor with apes thats fine I guess regardless of the hundreds of skeletal remains that have been found dating back 3 million years demonstrating a near perfect transition from ape to man... I mean you can physically touch these fossils they are not constructed or copies they are the result of millions of years of perfect preservation and the efforts of thousands to locate them. I truly cannot grasp the fact that there is any logical way to reject something that is tangible and dateable scientifically and geographically to an extremely accurate degree time and time again there are dozens of examples of each...
Animals and plants reproduce after their own kind. There are no legitimate fossil records disproving this. Of course, certain families of animals can be mixed (like canines with canines, horses & zebras, cats with cats, and so on). You don't see anything like a cat with a frog's head or anything really crazy like that. It's the same with humans. Fossils do not show the ancestry of man. Mutations do occur in the human DNA, though, but are nearly always (if not always) bad (think of cancerous growths). Fossils also do not support evolution. Evolution is pure chance. The interpolation is frequently inaccurate and extrapolation is imaginative because most the the scientists that are reconstructing the skeletal remains are governed by the fact that "it must be human" therefore the (crushed) pelvis should have a particular shape and the finger and toe bones must be straight instead of curved and so on. I find it much easier to believe in the biblical account of the origin of man rather than the chance of evolution being correct. The odds are stacked against evolution by a country mile and then some. I tried figuring all this stuff out earlier in life, too, thinking there could be some evolution that explained everythign. I also studied every religion, too. I've read the (Christian) bible several times through, word-for-word, page-by-page for years, too, and it just makes so much more sense and there is no hard scientific evidence that disputes the bible. To use the words of an evolutionist, Pilbeam's review of Leaky's Origins
, "My reservations concern no so much this book, but the whole subject of paleoanthropology. But introductory books - or book reviews - are hardly a place to argue that perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark, that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather, the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleoanthropology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about. But that is heresy."
Now these were those words from an evolutionist and not my words. I believe that evolution is a secular religion. I've heard it said at other times by other evolutionists that they propagate their work because it best suits their lifestyle of living without a creator God and allows them to make themselves their own god without rules.
Yet you believe in god, that has no tangible evidence who's story is merely a few thousand years older than the written word made by some of the same people who believed in sea monsters religiously or that they could sail off the edge of the flat planet...
Before the (Christian) bible could be compiled, it had to pass a rigourous test of the canon to make sure that everything included was consistent with itself and was recorded by legitimate contributors. There is much more that can be said about this, so I'll keep this response brief. The accounts of history of the nation of Israel as reported in the bible and even of Christ himself have not been found to be inaccurate. Even Christ's assension into heaven was seen by many witnesses, as was much of His life and work. In our day and age, you only need a couple of witnesses to put someone away, and yet Christ's works were seen and documented by many witnesses. Just because it happened a couple thousand years ago doesn't mean it didn't happen. Documented writings and a changed world serve a great proof.
You want to know the difference between fact and fiction? Assume there is an immortal child that was taught no history, no science, no religion, just given a basic education involving perhaps critical thinking, problem solving, and basic record keeping abilities, you get the idea, put them on this planet as an adult the day after any trace of every human being living today including everything in recent years well say 10k years ago for arguments sake has been vaporized a clean slate from the ground up of the planet. If he starts digging, one day after a 100k years of curiosity strikes him and he is not going to find religion hes going to find bones of mammals like the ones below including bones that look like ours and hell put together a story much like the one below... Any rational man would. However what he will not find is religion because there was no one there to tell him that it exist. If today everyone stopped completely talking about god if it was illegal to so much a speak a religious word after the new generations replaced us and we are dead and gone religion would cease to exist... The bones of these creatures they are still there documenting the event of evolution clearly as they always have. Religion is a a story written by man and nothing more. My point is people can find bones without prior knowledge, people will never find god without prior knowledge because he is fiction, perhaps they will write a fiction of their own with bobo sacs the clown as the creator still doesn't make it true.
Romans 1:20-23 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-his eternal power adn divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal men and birds and animals and reptiles."
Isaiah 40:8 "The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever."
... and one of my favorites that I believe addresses your last statements is...
II Peter 1:20-21 "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried by the Holy Spirit."
Missionaries exist for a reason, to spread the word of god? Why cant he spread it himself? Why has an all powerful being directly influenced not a damn thing ever? What purpose does he have if he is absent?
Christian missionaries go to spread the message out of obedience. Christ followers are the current hands and feet of Christ. Not seeing God does not mean that God does not exist and affect us. God reveals Himself to those with an open and willing heart and mind. God's purpose is not our to put into a little box and control. God created humans to have a relationship. However, God is only pleased by the human's faith. He is a just and perfect God, but also patient and His answers are wiser than our questions. His goal is not to appease our every desire. God deals with the issue of human behavior and sin and can forgive that sin and bring peace and hope, and gives wisdom, security, and oftentimes much-needed healing. Our timing is not Gods, and His ways are above our ways.
Heaven was said to be in the sky god lived in the clouds when the bible was written before flight and space travel were invented they chose an unreachable place for this being to dwell, well technology granted us the ability to fly through his house and no one is home.
When God freed the nation of Israel from slavery in Egypt, they were in the desert and sometimes didn't know where to go. God told them to follow him in a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. Also, after Christ's resurrection, He ascended into heaven. During the rapture, Christ followers will be caught up in the clouds to meet Christ. So there are several references about clouds and the heavens, but I don't believe God actually stays in the clouds. I don't know where Christ's (physically) abode is located, but it doesn't matter to me. He's only a prayer away.
How do you react to other religions are they stupid and foolish for believing in any other god than your own and if so why..? If you write one single answer to this question you are either going to contradict yourself or spit some non factual faith based BS.
I respect others and do not put them down for their beliefs. I am supposed to love others regardless of their beliefs. I do not like it when someone says that the Christ's teachings are rubbish and that Christ followers are stupid for believing in the bible rather than evolution. I see the results of much deliberate manipulation of scientific data only for the sole purpose of trying to disprove there is a Creator God. I see evolution as its one secular religion in direct conflict with the teachings of the bible. As for other religions, though, it is not for me to judge them. To use Christ's own words,....
John 14:6 "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father (God) except through me."
So you see that Christ is either a liar, lunatic, or He is who He say He is.
I realize this was a long post, so my apologies to the moderators. I hope that some folks might find this useful. If anyone would like to talk more about this, please feel free to PM me so that we can get the OP back on its original track of just taking a poll.