Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: We did not evolve from Apes

Expand Messages
  • Evangelist/Apologist, Chip Broome
    ... when ... as ... that ... only ... a ... and ... the ... intelligent, ... I would also like to add this
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 25, 2004
      --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, "Evangelist/Apologist,
      Chip Broome" <RevEvangelist@b...> wrote:
      >
      > There are some fossilized ape remains which Darwinian paleo-
      > anthropologists interpret as being some sort of transition between
      > ape and men. Most people seem to think of these interpretations
      when
      > they imagine cavemen. They picture furry half-men half-ape crouched
      > in a cave next to a fire, drawing on the walls with their newly
      > developed stone tools. This is a common misconception. And as far
      as
      > Darwinian paleo-anthropology goes, please keep in mind that these
      > interpretations reflect a peculiar worldview. They are not
      > necessarily the clear leading of the evidence. In fact, not only is
      > there major opposition to these interpretations within the academic
      > community, the Darwinists themselves don't entirely agree with each
      > other on the details.
      >
      > Unfortunately, the popular mainstream view has become this idea
      that
      > man evolved from some sort of ape, but this is certainly not the
      only
      > plausible interpretation of the available evidence. In fact, the
      > evidence in favor of this particular interpretation is lacking. For
      > more information on this, check out:
      > http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/Anthropology.asp
      >
      > When God created Adam and Eve, they were fully developed human
      > beings, capable of communication, society, and development (Genesis
      > 2:19-25; 3:1-20; 4:1-12). It is almost entertaining the lengths
      > evolutionary scientists go to prove the existence of prehistoric
      > cavemen. They find a misshaped tooth in a cave and from that create
      a
      > misshapen human being who lived in a cave and hunched over like an
      > ape. There is no way that scientist can prove the existence of
      > cavemen by a fossil. Evolutionary scientists simply have a theory
      and
      > then they force the evidence to fit the theory. Adam and Eve were
      the
      > first human beings ever created and were fully-evolved,
      intelligent,
      > and upright.

      I would also like to add this
      article:http://www.apologeticspress.org/defdocs/2001/dd-01-15.htm
    • remington186@aol.com
      Evangelist/Apologist, Chip Broome , wrote, Date: Fri Dec 24, 2004 6:56 am There are some fossilized ape remains which Darwinian
      Message 2 of 5 , Jan 21, 2005
        "Evangelist/Apologist, Chip Broome" <RevEvangelist@b...>, wrote,
        Date:  Fri Dec 24, 2004  6:56 am

               There are some fossilized ape remains which Darwinian paleoanthropologists 
               interpret as being some sort of transition between ape and men.

        Hello Chip,
        After more than 150 years of the theory of evolution you'd think EVERYBODY would KNOW neither Darwin, nor any other evolutionist, EVER POSTULATED THAT MAN EVOLVED FROM APES. The theory is: they evolved from a common ancestor. Again, no scientist says man evolved from apes. Not even Charles Darwin.

        Chip, it behooves our Christian witness not to be setting up strawmen [what for? To sway the popular mind?] so we - can war with ungodly scientists? Didn't we learn anything when The Church came close to excommunicating Gallileo? Didn't we learn anything from the great religious controversy over "Flat Earth"?

        What's your position on men landing on the moon? Shortly after 29 July 1969 I was talking to a preacher and he became quite vehement that the moon landing was a Hollywood production.

               Most people seem to think of these interpretations when they imagine cavemen. 
               They picture furry half-men half-ape crouched in a cave next to a fire, drawing on
               the walls with their newly developed stone tools. This is a common 
               misconception. And as far as Darwinian paleo-anthropology goes, please keep
               in mind that these interpretations reflect a peculiar worldview. They are not
               necessarily the clear leading of the evidence. In fact, not only is there major
               opposition to these interpretations within the academic community, the
               Darwinists themselves don't entirely agree with each other on the details.

        I really wonder, Chip, how versed you are in paleoanthropology. Darwin concerned himself with speciation and the the effects of speciation on developing changes in species. This was what he called evolution. For example, a bird that flew to the island of Mauritius many thousands of years ago, became fat and lazy and eventually flightless because it had no enemies. It was easy prey for the first white men that landed there in the 15th Century; and was shortly exterminated; the Dodo.
        For example, insects and fish that became trapped in underground caverns and lakes over centuries, lost the organ of sight. For example, man has bred changes in animals, thereby "proving" evolution.

               Unfortunately, the popular mainstream view has become this idea that man 
               evolved from some sort of ape, but this is certainly not the only plausible

        It sounds like you're saying "the popular mainstream view" is not the same as the scientific view ... which is quite true; but I rather think, to you, "the popular" is the view of scientists - quite untrue.

               interpretation of the available evidence. In fact, the evidence in favor of this
               particular interpretation is lacking. For more information on this, check out:
              http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/Anthropology.asp

               When God created Adam and Eve, they were fully developed human beings, 
               capable of communication, society, and development (Genesis 2:19-25; 3:1-20;
               4:1-12).

        What God has done and does is indisputable [and perhaps unknowable for humans who are not His children, i.e., without His Spirit.]. What happens to fish trapped in underground lakes for generations is indisputable.

               It is almost entertaining the lengths evolutionary scientists go to prove
               the existence of prehistoric cavemen. They find a misshaped tooth in a cave
               and from that create a misshapen human being who lived in a cave and hunched 
               over like an ape. There is no way that scientist can prove the existence of 
               cavemen by a fossil. Evolutionary scientists simply have a theory and then they 
               force the evidence to fit the theory.

        You are neither a scientist nor very knowledgable of scientific matters. Scientists are not eager to argue and quibble and debate with unknowledgable people. They have their work to do. I would assume your calling is evangelism and not setting up strawmen [Men evolved from Apes] to malign dedicated scientists. Or stir up the popular mind.

               Adam and Eve were the first human beings ever created and were fully-evolved, 
               intelligent, and upright.

        Seems like it, huh. But of course that wasn't millions of years ago, was it. So those creatures [such as dinosaurs] from millions of years ago had absolutely nothing to do with God's creation of Adam and Eve. So why "beat at the air?"

               Chip Broome
               Evangelist/Apologist

        Shalom, shalom,
        Remington Mandel
        Hemet CA USA
      • RevEvangelist@bellsouth.net
        ... I do know that this world just didn t happen, that it had a designer and that can only be the logical conclusion. Evangelist Oscar Broome Jr Are you good
        Message 3 of 5 , Jan 21, 2005
          >
          > From: remington186@...
          > Date: 2005/01/21 Fri PM 12:43:55 EST
          > To: biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com
          > Subject: Re: [biblicalapologetics] We did not evolve from Apes
          >
          > "Evangelist/Apologist, Chip Broome" <RevEvangelist@b...>, wrote,
          > Date: Fri Dec 24, 2004 6:56 am
          >
          > There are some fossilized ape remains which Darwinian
          > paleoanthropologists
          > interpret as being some sort of transition between ape and men.
          >
          > Hello Chip,
          > After more than 150 years of the theory of evolution you'd think EVERYBODY
          > would KNOW neither Darwin, nor any other evolutionist, EVER POSTULATED THAT MAN
          > EVOLVED FROM APES. The theory is: they evolved from a common ancestor. Again,
          > no scientist says man evolved from apes. Not even Charles Darwin.
          >
          > Chip, it behooves our Christian witness not to be setting up strawmen [what
          > for? To sway the popular mind?] so we - can war with ungodly scientists? Didn't
          > we learn anything when The Church came close to excommunicating Gallileo?
          > Didn't we learn anything from the great religious controversy over "Flat Earth"?
          >
          > What's your position on men landing on the moon? Shortly after 29 July 1969 I
          > was talking to a preacher and he became quite vehement that the moon landing
          > was a Hollywood production.
          >
          > Most people seem to think of these interpretations when they imagine
          > cavemen.
          > They picture furry half-men half-ape crouched in a cave next to a
          > fire, drawing on
          > the walls with their newly developed stone tools. This is a common
          > misconception. And as far as Darwinian paleo-anthropology goes, please
          > keep
          > in mind that these interpretations reflect a peculiar worldview. They
          > are not
          > necessarily the clear leading of the evidence. In fact, not only is
          > there major
          > opposition to these interpretations within the academic community, the
          >
          > Darwinists themselves don't entirely agree with each other on the
          > details.
          >
          > I really wonder, Chip, how versed you are in paleoanthropology. Darwin
          > concerned himself with speciation and the the effects of speciation on developing
          > changes in species. This was what he called evolution. For example, a bird that
          > flew to the island of Mauritius many thousands of years ago, became fat and
          > lazy and eventually flightless because it had no enemies. It was easy prey for
          > the first white men that landed there in the 15th Century; and was shortly
          > exterminated; the Dodo.
          > For example, insects and fish that became trapped in underground caverns and
          > lakes over centuries, lost the organ of sight. For example, man has bred
          > changes in animals, thereby "proving" evolution.
          >
          > Unfortunately, the popular mainstream view has become this idea that
          > man
          > evolved from some sort of ape, but this is certainly not the only
          > plausible
          >
          > It sounds like you're saying "the popular mainstream view" is not the same as
          > the scientific view ... which is quite true; but I rather think, to you, "the
          > popular" is the view of scientists - quite untrue.
          >
          > interpretation of the available evidence. In fact, the evidence in
          > favor of this
          > particular interpretation is lacking. For more information on this,
          > check out:
          > http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/Anthropology.asp
          >
          > When God created Adam and Eve, they were fully developed human beings,
          >
          > capable of communication, society, and development (Genesis 2:19-25;
          > 3:1-20;
          > 4:1-12).
          >
          > What God has done and does is indisputable [and perhaps unknowable for humans
          > who are not His children, i.e., without His Spirit.]. What happens to fish
          > trapped in underground lakes for generations is indisputable.
          >
          > It is almost entertaining the lengths evolutionary scientists go to
          > prove
          > the existence of prehistoric cavemen. They find a misshaped tooth in a
          > cave
          > and from that create a misshapen human being who lived in a cave and
          > hunched
          > over like an ape. There is no way that scientist can prove the
          > existence of
          > cavemen by a fossil. Evolutionary scientists simply have a theory and
          > then they
          > force the evidence to fit the theory.
          >
          > You are neither a scientist nor very knowledgable of scientific matters.
          > Scientists are not eager to argue and quibble and debate with unknowledgable
          > people. They have their work to do. I would assume your calling is evangelism and
          > not setting up strawmen [Men evolved from Apes] to malign dedicated scientists.
          > Or stir up the popular mind.
          >
          > Adam and Eve were the first human beings ever created and were
          > fully-evolved,
          > intelligent, and upright.
          >
          > Seems like it, huh. But of course that wasn't millions of years ago, was it.
          > So those creatures [such as dinosaurs] from millions of years ago had
          > absolutely nothing to do with God's creation of Adam and Eve. So why "beat at the
          > air?"
          >
          > Chip Broome
          > Evangelist/Apologist
          >
          > Shalom, shalom,
          > Remington Mandel
          > Hemet CA USA
          >
          > No, I am not a scientist but really how knowledgable do you have to be to see what I have already said. Scientist's are not the absolute authority either and to appeal to them as such is a fallacy. You must not be a scientist either are you would not have had need to respond. You are trying to use a strawman argument to defeat a strawman argument according to you. There is no need to attack me but take everything to it's logical conclusion and you will see that evolution is a theory and there is no evidence for it. I do not malign dedicated scientists but I do question their theory.

          I do know that this world just didn't happen, that it had a designer and that can only be the logical conclusion.

          Evangelist Oscar Broome Jr


          Are you good enough to go to heaven? Take the test and see. http://www.livingwaters.com/needGod/001.shtml

          Frontline Apologetics
        • Eric Pement
          ... Hello, this is my first post to this mailing list. I m a Christian and I m interested in the topic of apologetics. I beg to differ. In his book The
          Message 4 of 5 , Feb 5, 2005
            --- In biblicalapologetics@yahoogroups.com, remington186@a... wrote:

            > Hello Chip,
            >
            > After more than 150 years of the theory of evolution you'd think
            > EVERYBODY would KNOW neither Darwin, nor any other evolutionist,
            > EVER POSTULATED THAT MAN EVOLVED FROM APES. The theory is: they
            > evolved from a common ancestor. Again, no scientist says man
            > evolved from apes. Not even Charles Darwin.

            Hello, this is my first post to this mailing list. I'm a Christian
            and I'm interested in the topic of apologetics.

            I beg to differ. In his book "The Descent of Man" (1871), Darwin not
            only said that man descended from apes, but that humans specifically
            descended from the "Old World monkeys", as opposed to the New World
            monkeys. The statement appears in Chapter 6 of "Descent of Man" in
            the penultimate paragraph. The text reads as follows:

            The Simiadae then branched off into two great stems, the
            New World and Old World monkeys; and from the latter, at
            a remote period, Man, the wonder and glory of the Universe,
            proceeded.

            The statement is unmistakeable: Man "proceeded" from the Old World
            monkeys.

            If you google on ("Charles Darwin" "Descent of Man" full-text), you
            will find several full-text editions of "Descent of Man" online. Here
            is one of them:

            http://www.zoo.uib.no/classics/darwin/descent.chap6.html

            In this version, you will will have to look up 3 paragraphs from the
            end, not two. The paragraph in italics, which would otherwise be
            represented as a footnote, is inserted into the text.

            I will agree that evolutionary biologists do not *now* say that humans
            descended from Old World monkeys. But it is undeniable that Darwin
            said so.

            Kind regards,

            Eric Pement
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.