New Directions

No, this is not a promotion of the cast of Glee.  I have decided that I am both not posting enough and also not posting in one direction.  As a Christian, this being the greatest aspect of my life I believe that the best direction to go is to point this blog towards God.  This does not mean that if any other major events happen I will pass over them but generally God should be the emphasis of this blog from now on.


10 thoughts on “New Directions

  1. The bible was just a fairytale written by man. Evolution probes is wrong.

    If God is real, why does he let the bad things happen. Just doesn’t make sense. Christians are so arrogant. They have that many denominations, that many bibles that many contradicting views. God would not allow that to happen. He just doesn’t exist simple as that.

  2. The Bible is not a fairytale. It says in the Bible that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” Think of it like this, when you write a letter do you write the letter or does the pen. You do, but you use the pen. Just as you use the pen, God used men to write the Bible. There are no contradictions in the bible either but there are many flaws with the theory of Evolution. Micro-Evolution does happen but Macro-Evolution does not. It has never been proved that any species can transform into another species but the Bible has not been disproved.

    Because God is real he lets bad things happen as a trial. For example, in Job, God allowed Satan to kill all of Job’s family but still he said “blessed be the name of the Lord.” Christians are arrogant because they believe in something that has never been disproved. There are multiple denominations and Bibles that is down to different interpretations. God has allowed that to happen.

  3. I don’t believe the bible so that is of no relevance to me.. Men still wrote the bible whatever way you try and twist it.

    You obviously have not examined the overwhelming evidence which Darwin has presented. We evolved and so did other species.

    The bible has great inaccuracies. And all this nonsense about prophecy is totally false.

  4. OK so tell me the overwhelming evidence, please. I just cannot fathom the concept myself and I am no expert but can Darwinism be proved until a missing link is found ? One problem with evolution is, well the evolving part. If we did evolve from the ocean as fish or other sea life does that mean that we originally had lungs or gills ? If there were lungs how did that work under water and if we had gills how did we survive when crawling up unto the beach ? If this were to happen we would have to have evolved out of gills and into lungs by the time we got out of the water and onto land otherwise we would have all died. Also there would need to be both a male and female fish because a fish cant procreate by himself so a man and lady fish would have to have developed lungs and got rid of gills together so they could both crawl onto the beach and reproduce. What is your speculation concerning this summation ?

    Can you give me some inaccuracies and every prophesy up until modern day prophesy has happened so far so I have no doubt that prophesies relevant to later on in the future will come true also.

  5. So many proofs that your ignorant mind could not comprehend.

    The universal genetic code shows that all cells on Earth, from our white blood cells, to simple bacteria, to cells in the leaves of trees, are capable of reading any piece of DNA from any life form on Earth. This is very strong evidence for a common ancestor from which all life descended.

    The fossil record. The fossil record shows that the simplest fossils will be found in the oldest rocks, and it can also show a smooth and gradual transition from one form of life to another.

    Genetic commonalities show human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (source), 80% with cows (source), 75% with mice (source), and so on. This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past. And the amount of difference between our genomes corresponds to how long ago our genetic lines diverged.

    Common traits in embryos show that humans, dogs, snakes, fish, monkeys, eels (and many more life forms) are all considered “chordates” because we belong to the phylum Chordata. One of the features of this phylum is that, as embryos, all these life forms have gill slits, tails, and specific anatomical structures involving the spine. For humans (and other non-fish) the gill slits reform into the bones of the ear and jaw at a later stage in development. But, initially, all chordate embryos strongly resemble each other.

    In fact, pig embryos are often dissected in biology classes because of how similar they look to human embryos. These common characteristics could only be possible if all members of the phylum Chordata descended from a common ancestor.

    Bacteria colonies can only build up a resistance to antibiotics through evolution. It is important to note that in every colony of bacteria, there are a tiny few individuals which are naturally resistant to certain antibiotics. This is because of the random nature of mutations.

    When an antibiotic is applied, the initial inoculation will kill most bacteria, leaving behind only those few cells which happen to have the mutations necessary to resist the antibiotics. In subsequent generations, the resistant bacteria reproduce, forming a new colony where every member is resistant to the antibiotic. This is natural selection in action. The antibiotic is “selecting” for organisms which are resistant, and killing any that are not.

    You don’t know anything about evolution. It does not dictate we came from fish, but slime. You are obviously being taught by ignorant bigoted Christians. You know nothing.

    Nice try, but don’t try and lie to me again.

  6. With science I am pretty out of my depth but here goes …

    Yes the genetic code. A wonderful addition that God created when he made the world. We may have common ancestors but it does not mean we evolved from them. We also have a common ancestor in the banana but, well .. you know what I mean.

    Concerning fossils we have found very very old fossils, which could have been formed billions of years ago or they could have been aged by a universal flood. But how come we have never found intermediately aged fossils linking the old ones to modern day. Also, the use of carbon dating, as a side note, to show fossils billions of years old cannot be seen as genuine as in the past we have seen that carbon dating has dated wrongly on objects we know the date of for sure.

    We may have genetic commonalities to chimpanzees etc and you are correct it does not prove this because we also have, as said before, a 50% genetic commonality with bananas.

    Relating to common traits in embryos does this mean that humans in fact do have gills, but we cannot use them now ? Also, embryos are unborn. With my theory I was talking about when the fish were already born. So would that not imply that before birth they had gills but if they did not get out of the water quick enough they would have drown because they would have evolved out of the gills.

    This is true that bacteria colonies can build up a resistance but they have not changed from something else into a bacterium, therefore is it not if anything micro-evolution in process. Or what will a bacteria transform into ?

    Studies throughout the years have proven that many animals did not undergo evolution. If it happened would it not have happened across the board with all animals. Fossils have indeed shown however that animals such as grasshoppers, frogs, ants and moths have not changed overt years.

    Ok concerning the slime. I am going to put across to you now a story. Billions of years ago there was a massive explosion. This big bang produced some rock. Over millions of years some dust and gunge formed on the rock surface and, over time, it formed into a pool of chocolate. Some of the dust caramelised and formed into a sweet caramel layer. Some of the chocolate became fluffy after being blasted by a solar wind, which produced a nougat layer. The layers joined and emerged from the pool of chocolate in a bar shape. Somehow plastic formed and grew around the bar. Millions of years later paint dripped out of the sky onto the plastic wrapper and formed itself into the words ‘Chocolate Bar 62.5g’. Is this therefore evolution. Doesn’t this sound childish to you.

    Also, evolution leaves everything to chance. It means that for example, a great example, is the banana. Think about it it is perfectly shaped for our hands, it has a non-slip skin, it has indicators to tell us when to eat it, green to early, yellow is good and black is out of date. It tastes good and can perfectly fit into the human mouth when you bite into it. Evolution would therefore say that it by chance, by accident, happened like this to be perfect for humans in every conceivable way. To believe that a car did not have a maker, a painting did not have an artist or a house did not have a builder would be unrealistic. Therefore how could the world happen by chance. Doesn’t it sound unrealistic ?

    Why is there a missing link that i spoke about ? Until then I cannot believe it.

  7. One major flaw with evolution is that macro-evolution, a mutation of one species into another species. Since Evolution supposedly happens over a long period of time there should be living examples of evolution happening now with new species being brought into the world each year but according to the World Wildlife Organisation species of animals are declining in number year on year. Therefore there is no evolving from one species into another because at least 10,000 species are made extinct each year if there are 100,000,000 species to begin with including the ones that we have not discovered yet.

    Darwin said he found macro-evolution within birds in the Galapagos but what he actually observed was micro-evolution because they were all variations of the one species of bird. People who saw the birds beaks, which he saw as new species, found it hard to find any differences in the beaks. This proves micro-evolution which certainly is true.

  8. By the way I am not trying to be arrogant and am certainly not saying I know everything. I love that you are willing to discuss this, even if I slip up or you slip up it is only a healthy discussion. Thank you for giving your view here on For Such a Time as This 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s