• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Not a lot of respect for men

I have since found What does it mean that women will be "saved" through childbearing (1 Timothy 2:15)? | GotQuestions.org this site which states that this verse is often misinterpreted so it's something I am still considering.
I love GotQuestions.org. I don't know if they know what 1 Timothy 2:15 means. I read their answer, but I still don't know.
Upvote 0

Now does everyone understand why the "right to refuse illegal orders" video was made?

Yep, you want your military lawyers bowing to the political tides and ideology of whoever happens to be in power at the time and not providing neutral, fact-based, politically-independent legal advice. Because that has no possibility whatsoever of boomeranging on anyone. And the people who are in power now are always going to be in power. So there will be no see-sawing of legal interpretations. And no consequences!
Yep you want your Obama DoD papal infallibility quotient exempted from the Trump DoD.
Upvote 0

Eve and the Fallacy of Moral Choices

Again, you throw up a strawman argument about claiming I am suggesting, some people are sinless, which I never even suggested.
Never said you did. What you do miss is that sin is not a people only situation. There are other operators involved that are not people.
A lot is made of the fact Paul switched to the present tense in these verses, but was there a reason that the Roman reader to pick up on this switch and better understand what Paul was saying? We are reading other peoples mail to Romans in Rome during the first century, so what would be the best way to communicate a huge victory over sin to them?
The "Victory" was not counting sins against people.

But the war remains ongoing in case you missed that part
When Mark describes in his Gospel is Christ’s great battle with a climatic victory being Christ rising, he wrote it in the “historic present tense”. Supporting the idea Mark was in Rome at the time.
Beside the point, whatever point you're trying to make

As to tense, there is no doubt that Paul had evil present withIN him, causing his mind to sin in thought ala Mark 7:21-23
What Paul is describing in Romans 7: 14-24 is a great battle and final climatic victory over sin in the “historic present tense”.
Yet Paul's flesh still served the "law of sin," vs. 25, so maybe not get the victory cart in front of the horse?
Sin has purpose for the nonbeliever, but what “purpose” does it have in the believer life?
Why differentiate? Our sin is no different than that of any person. Paul claimed to be "chief of same" present tense, 1 Tim. 1:9
When Deity dwelled unquenched in a human (Christ) it did not sin, so does deity dwell within Christians, so the problem is really the quenching of the Spirit?
I'd suggest that there was one huge colossal difference involved, being only ONE was without sin. No one else has that claim. It is held only by God in Christ.
On every major street corner in Rome were monuments to some great Roman victory, some parts of these monuments are in museums today and below each is given an exciting climatic description of the battle in the “historic present tense”. This was the same description carried by messengers sent out by the general over the Roman Empire, after a great victory.
I'd suggest your figures don't figure. We all deal with adversaries unseen. So if your quest is to make some other claim, be clear about it. The devil still exists and sin still exists and death still exists. So your "victory claim" is not yet completed and won't be until the end of the devil and his messengers.
Similar to this Roman section on (the war and victory over sin) is Mark’s whole Gospel of Christ’s war against satan’s follows of this world”.

As far as Ro. 7: 14-24

The Gospel of Mark was mimicking the messages that were sent out by the Roman generals after winning a great battle. These messages went with messengers to dramatically present the battle with the victory at the end, to the cheers of the crowd. They were always in the present tense and we have some copies that were written in stone under the battle monuments that were spread throughout Rome. The Gospel of Mark is written in the style of these Victory Messages sent by the Roman General to the Roman Empire and Mark’s is very much a victory message. Do you think, Paul in keep with the Roman culture of the day, would have written His victorious battle over sin in the present tense to the Romans in Rome?
Mimicking Roman generals? Unlikely. Nice imagination stab, but a rather hollow analogy considering that mankind had been at war for thousands of years before "Roman generals" besides the ongoing unseen war with our adverse spiritual adversaries that are impetus behind all war and killing.
It is called the “historic present tense”, by scholars and would fit what Paul was saying to the Romans.

This topic and the use of Romans 7: 14-24 come up a lot and a lot has been written on it.

The context helps and you need to address these questions:
IF your claim is that Paul was sinless because of Christ, you'd be quite entirely off the page.

Paul wrote of his situation in the present tense application and it still applies the same way to everyone to this day.
1. When did Paul learn about “coveting”?
That the law promoted sin, which Paul termed "no longer I" to input illegal thoughts into his mind, and thereby he determined that evil was present withIN him.
2. When did this problem start for Paul?
We are all born as blinded sinners, timing in or out of the womb notwithstanding. I'd suggest at the moment of our creation, Psalm 51:5
3. Does Paul continue in the misery and what would relief this misery?
Paul spent his entire life in grief, Romans 9:2
4. Is “just being forgiven” a good solution to the problem?
There is only one solution and that hasn't transpired yet.
5. When did Paul obtain the solution?
You're trying to isolate Paul from having to deal internally with the tempter. I'd suggest you're barking up the wrong tree with that angle because it was never a question of just Paul or just people to start with.

Where is our adversary in YOUR picture? You basically don't have a adversary or you trumpet your victory while still being a sinner. Sorry, doesn't work or compute.
The answer to the problem of sinning while here on earth is solved with Romans chapter 8 and the indwelling holy Spirit.
Christ condemned sin in sinful flesh. That hasn't changed. YET sins are not counted against people, 2 Cor. 5:19 which again brings us back to the basic point.
We are all being temped by sin, but True Christians have the indwelling Holy Spirit to overcome those temptations. Ro. 3:9
Look, you really are beating around the bush on this subject. We ALL have evil thoughts that defile us. Now even in your theology world you're not avoiding that fact. The only part you're missing is the other party that is behind it all.

And THAT was the entire point of the opening post concerning Adam, Eve and the sin of the DEVIL in them both.
2 Cor. 12:7 talks about the help he receives from satan’s thorn in the flesh Paul was given, but that is not satan himself living in Paul.
Paul was exceptionally clear it was a messenger of Satan aka as a DEVIL, not "thee" devil, but "they" are all from the same seed, the same family, the same kingdom. The devil has children too aka seeds, tares, thorns, goats, etc.
Gal. 4: 14 “and even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself.”
Nice spin on turning "temptation" into ILLNESS. I guess you could spin it that way but the messenger of Satan is not an illness. Might cause illness, but no. Temptations defile all of us and Paul's temptations were spelled out quite clearly in Romans 7:7-13, lustful thoughts.
We all get sick sometimes while on earth, but that can help us.
boy, you just really don't care to drag the devils into these pictures do you?

WHY is that? No wonder to me.
1 Cor. 10: 13 No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can endure it.

We can use our failures of the past as part of our witness, since we are no longer the same person.
You're fixated on a people only positions. No use in scripture understandings at all because you're missing a very critical piece. You know, the one you can't even bring into the pictures.
All mature adults have sinned in the past, but the indwelling Spirit does not sin, but we can quench the Spirit and sin.
Brilliant conclusion except for the fact that we all have evil thoughts that defile us and that sin is of the devil.
The main question (a diatribe question) in Romans 9 Paul addresses is God being fair or just Rms. 9: 14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all!
The point again being is that one of the parties in the "lump of me" is as Paul said, "NO LONGER I."

There "will be" permanent retribution to THOSE PARTIES on the horizon.
This will take some explaining, since just prior in Romans 9, Paul went over some history of God’s dealings with the Israelites that sounds very “unjust” like “loving Jacob and hating Esau” before they were born, but remember in all of Paul’s diatribes he begins before, just after or before and just after with strong support for the wrong answer (this makes it more of a debate and giving the opposition the first shot as done in all diatribes).
Your diatribes just miss the obvious and revolve only around people. It's actually quite funny that you can't bring the devil, our very real ADVERSARY into any of these pictures.
Who in Rome would be having a “problem” with God choosing to work with Isaac and Jacob instead of Ishmael and Esau? Would the Jewish Christian have a problem with this or would it be the Gentile Christians?
Again you miss a very basic point "because" you can't bring the other party into the picture. The "eldest" is a representative of a blinded slave of Satan, ala Acts 26:18, 2 Cor. 3:14, 2 Cor. 4:4, Eph. 2:2

I'm sure you can see "this fact" is the condition of the "first born."

The 2nd person, the born again person SEES their condition and resists our enemy, our adversary, our prior CAPTOR.

So was it Esau that was hated? Never. It was always the enemy who is hated and that is not PEOPLE, yet is with people. Paul again isolates this exact fact, the spirit of slumber or stupor, that God put upon not only all of Israel, but upon all people. The born again person SEES this fact.

The "war" between "Ishmael" and "Isaac" is a war fought within US, the believers. Clueless people remain slaves.
If God treaded you as privileged and special would you have a problem or would you have a problem if you were treated seemingly as common and others were treated with honor for no apparent reason?
Has nothing to do with only people. I think we've isolated your one sided sight long enough quite frankly.

I basically reject your one sided views as void of the obvious BUT unseen factor in operations from cover to cover in the scriptures. A fact that your positions simply have no answer for.
Upvote 0

Teen on Royal Caribbean cruise attacked by HIV-infected illegal immigrant: police

Royal Caribbean is back in the news.

Family sues Royal Caribbean after man allegedly served 33 drinks dies aboard cruise ship

Upvote 0

B flat B♭

St
I said, you can't debate science from the Bible.
@Apple Sky was unable to answer any of the questions that I asked, using the Bible as reference.

Some people read the Bible literally when it was not meant to be read that way.
You won't find scientific explanations in the Bible; that is not its purpose.
We use, have and do many things today which are not mentioned in the Bible.

It's not in any way a science textbook - not even partially.

No, it isn't.
It is the final authority on God; on his nature, his will, his actions and his relationship with mankind.

You can't give the Bible to someone studying physics to use as a textbook. You won't learn Biology, Zoology, Chemistry, Astrophysics or any other science subject from the pages of Scripture.
In the same way that you won't learn Spanish from a cookery book that mentions Paella and Spanish wine.
You won't become an artist because you read a novel about someone who learns to draw.
Someone could read a biography about the Beatles; it doesn't mean they can sing. Or you could find out all about Mozart; it doesn't mean you'll be able to play the piano/clarinet/violin.

If you're interested in science, quantum physics, chemistry, astronomy and so on - go and read the appropriate books.
If you want to know God and have a relationship with him; read the Bible.
There are people who do both and find no contradiction.
Stonginhim you mention that some people readthe literally where it is not supposed read literally
Upvote 0

Dear Pete Hegseth, I’m Grateful the Japanese Navy Spared My Grandfather’s Life

Aren't we glad Jesus doesn't have this attitude.
When Jesus returns most people are going overwhelmed by his wrath.They are going to cry out for an avalanche to bury them to hide them from the wrath of Jesus. When drug smugglers see Jesus they're going to want to be taken out my a missile, rather than face the wrath of Jesus. Revelation 6:16.

I think perhaps you don't know enough about Jesus to gage what his attitude is.
Upvote 0

Trickster Christ and the Second Fall: A New Framework for Understanding the Kingdom of God

This study interprets the Kingdom of God as a divine drama where angelic autonomy exists through unilateral contradiction, and salvation emerges through the completion rather than reversal of the Fall. Please offer your critical views.

The Kingdom of God exists within the divine mind as a semi-autonomous realm where angelic beings experience genuine freedom while remaining encompassed within God's consciousness. Drawing on Constantin Noica's concept of unilateral contradiction, the paper argues that while angels contradict God by asserting independence, God encompasses their opposition within divine unity. Tolkien's Silmarillion illustrates this principle through Ilúvatar's incorporation of Melkor's discord into a greater harmony.

Contrary to modern immanentist theology, the Church Fathers understood God's Kingdom primarily as celestial reality. While the celestial realm maintains ontological priority, the earthly Kingdom manifests within individual souls through recognition of the world's emptiness—a detachment that opens hearts to the Holy Spirit.

The paper reframes participation (methexis) as engagement in divine drama rather than sharing in divine substance. While medieval sacramental ontology is obsolete, creatures participate in dramatic forms within the celestial Kingdom. Creation maintains genuine autonomy and productive capacity, as Genesis reveals the earth itself 'bringing forth' life. Through unilateral contradiction, God encompasses rather than opposes autonomous creation.

Christ appears as redemptive trickster, paralleling Satan as dark trickster. However, Christ completes rather than reverses the Fall. Satan's incomplete fall preserved residual enchantment through which demonic powers maintained dominion. Christ initiated a 'Second Fall'—cosmic disenchantment that dissolved the sacral order, creating the void into which the Spirit descended at Pentecost.

This disenchantment represents liberation rather than abandonment. Our modern world of impersonal laws reflects Christ's dismantling of spiritual bondage. Paul advanced this disenchantment by declaring pagan idols 'nothing.' While most succumb to nihilism, a remnant attains salvation through connection to the transcendent Kingdom.

The Church serves protective-therapeutic rather than salvific functions. Following the Christus Medicus tradition, it protects humanity from residual demonic forces while providing spiritual therapy. However, mature Christians transcend ecclesiastical participation for direct communion with the Kingdom.

The Eucharist represents Christianity's controlled accommodation to humanity's need for material-spiritual mediation. Like a vaccine, it satisfies theophagy impulses without allowing descent into paganism. The Eucharist redirects pagan tendencies while preserving broader disenchantment. Extending eucharistic presence universally, as ressourcement theology proposes, would recreate the pagan cosmology Christianity intended to overcome.

Read the paper here: Divine Drama and Cosmic Disenchantment: The Kingdom of God as Dramatic Participation

Daniel 12 ended 70 AD

Daniel 12

12 “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise.
(this is about the war in heaven in Rev 12 Michael vs the devil. The war happened when Jesus said ◄ John 12:31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out, and Luke 10 18 And He said unto them, “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.)

There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then.
(this is about 70 AD. Jesus said it would be great tribulation greater than ever has been or would be - in context of the pre messianic, and Mosaic age, and 70 AD was the end of OT Israel, and the Mosaic age never to return ever again).


But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered. 2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise[a] will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever.
(prophecy of massive resurrection of the dead of every Israelite, "Daniels people"= Israelites, in the OT . The book is Gods book with his people in it referenced in Exodus 32:32–33, then in Revelation there is the lambs book which might just be NT times book with Christians names in it.)


4 But you, Daniel, roll up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.”
(the end means the end of the Mosaic age 70 AD not the end of time. Seal it because it won't happen until 70 AD. Could increase in knowledge be in reference to the Qumran sect which went back to books like 1 Enoch, Test of the 12, Jubilees? )

5 Then I, Daniel, looked, and there before me stood two others, one on this bank of the river and one on the opposite bank. 6 One of them said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, “How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled?”
7 The man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, lifted his right hand and his left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by him who lives forever, saying, “It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed.”
(3.5 years. 66 AD start of Judean Roman wars-70 AD temple destroyed or 70-73 AD ending with suicide at Masada. Daily sacrifices stopped both 66, and 70 AD in Josephus).

8 I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, “My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?”
9 He replied, “Go your way, Daniel, because the words are rolled up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.
11 “From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. 12 Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days.


Christians were purified 30-70 AD when they died for their faith- John Baptist, Stephen, Antipas are 3 named in the bible then there were more under Nero in the 60s AD
Another approx 3.5 year timeframe so 66-70 AD or 70-73 AD.
13 “As for you, go your way till the end. You will rest, and then at the end of the days you will rise to receive your allotted inheritance.”

John 5


25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.

28 Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned.
(same language as the prophecy of dead raising in Dan 12).

⭐ John 6:39–40

“I will raise him up on the last day.” (last day of the Mosaic covenant 70 AD).

⭐ John 6:44

“No one can come to Me unless the Father draws him… and I will raise him up at the last day.”

⭐ John 11:25–26

“I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in Me… will live even if he dies.”

⭐ Matthew 22:31–32 (also Mark 12:26–27; Luke 20:37–38)

“He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

⭐ Luke 14:14

“You will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”

⭐ Luke 20:35–36

“Those considered worthy to attain… and the resurrection from the dead… can no longer die.”


1 Thessalonians 4

14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

(Gospel of Nic explains Jesus took these people to paradise when he was dead for 3 days)

15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
(we who are alive means the apostle writing this text, and other first century Christians 2000 years ago it does not mean in the future)

16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
(this trumpet is in Revelation 10:7,and Rev 1-12 which happened 70 AD. It calls it the mystery of God. Gospel of Nic has more info on the people that raised from the dead the day Jesus died but there was going to be more around 70 AD)

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
(the living Christians in Judea at this event would of been raptured)

18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.



Now when he was crucified, there was darkness over all the world, and the sun was obscured for half a day, and the stars appeared, but no lustre was seen in them; and the moon lost its brightness, as though tinged with blood; and the world of the departed was swallowed up; so that the very sanctuary of the temple, as they call it, did not appear to the Jews themselves at their fall, but they perceived a chasm in the earth, and the rolling of successive thunders. And amid this terror the dead appeared rising again, as the Jews themselves bore witness, and said that it was Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the twelve patriarchs, and Moses, and Job, who had died before, as they say, some three thousand five hundred years. And there were very many whom I myself saw appearing in the body, and they made lamentation
over the Jews, because of the transgression which was committed by them, and because of the destruction of the Jews and of their law.

1 Corinthians 15


51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality

trumpet again Rev 10:7 7 But in the days when the seventh angel is about to sound his trumpet, the mystery of God will be accomplished, just as he announced to his servants the prophets.” both have the word mystery. We means the first Christians 2000 years ago not us today or future. Same kind of prophecy as the one in Thessalonians above.
Only Rev 1-12 happened 70 AD Rev 13-22 is future. There is a massive raising from the dead in Rev 20-22 which is still future.
The end of the animal apocalypse in 1 Enoch (written pre flood not pseudepigrapha) explains there was a huge spiritual judgement on OT Israelites first century AD too

Shark Feeding Frenzy

This is a short video of a shark feeding frenzy at Byron Bay in New South Wales as reported on the (Australian) ABC online news.


The bay is on the northern side of Cape Byron which is the eastern most point of mainland Australia.

There's a couple of swimmers taking a risk but they may not have been able to see the sharks.


PS - The article mentions a couple of Swiss nationals who were attacked at Crowdy Bay National Park last month. One of them died unfortunately but it seems they may have been swimming in the vicinity of bait balls.

KJV

Because it's not only the Bible that uses historic vernacular.

Take for instance the Romans and how they phrased quotations on engravings underneath their monuments or busts, and then think about if we had teachers rephrase these quotations so that we understood them in modern context. Why wouldn't we apply this to other writings?

Now, if we argue that we can't expect secular teachers to teach us the changes within our Bible, fine. But, surely, this is where the church comes in?

For example, our church uses the NIV. Seemingly, even some of the words and phrases which I consider to be 'everyday' and basic, are beyond the scope of what some have been taught or come across often, so our pastor provides alternate words or summarizes phrases in a more 'modern' way for generalized understanding.

The responsibility for learning has to lie somewhere. We can't all just delegate responsibility to someone else or just cease the pursuit of knowledge. There are many paths to learning if someone is willing to pursue them.
I don't wish for this to sound flippant so apologies if it has come across that way.

My point here, I guess, is I learned Shakespeare in school, I learned about Plato, I learned geometry and about Magellan and governments of countries I've never even heard of. None of my knowledge regarding how people spoke, learned or wrote at the time their ideas were formulated was inherent, some of my knowledge changed from how it was presented to me initially etc and if I had curiosity about them at a later date, due to a passing conversation or something I read, I sought to update what I thought I knew or reconfirm what I'd already learned.

I have taken the point of this post to be that there is no reason for us to speak in the colloquial ways of the KJV and it is not understood why anyone would choose to do so since no one really understands what is being said, in the main. However, I don't see that as true across the board and there are reasons why the KJV is referred to by many despite the language being outdated.

I also think that if a church is using the KJV, then it's okay to ask them about what certain things mean if we don't understand since we don't always know how to apply KJV text to modern language. They would have, in my opinion, a responsibility to clarify but we would have the responsibility to ask so we can learn.

I can't imagine being bothered by someone learning, teaching and applying physics just because I didn't understand it or the origins of it. If I felt that strongly about my lack of understanding, it would seem to me that it's my responsibility to learn so that I do understand or learn enough so that I can ask questions from the appropriate source.

Apologies if I have misunderstood the post!
Upvote 0

Do other Christians have trouble making friends?

I was wondering if any other Christians are having trouble with making friends. Friendships you're actually happy with and are good for you. It can be with other Christians or non-believers.

I feel like I have trouble. I don't really know where to find other Christians that are like me.

At work I'm around people I do not trust. They lie, they gossip, they're out to get others, etc. So I have to watch what I say and do, and protect myself.

I also haven't been to church in 6 years. I know that's bad. But I'm not impressed with the churches in my area.
I don't have advice other than to have friendly comments when you talk to people. Don't crticize or condemn. Don't complain about your upbringing. I wasn't allowed friends growing up and we moved every year.

How to Win Friends and Influence People is a 1936 self-help book written by Dale Carnegie. Over 30 million copies have been sold worldwide.
Upvote 0

Human/chimp genomic similarity drops to ~85%: for real this time?

Anybody remember me? I was a regular on this forum from 2004 until 2018, after which I mostly moved on to other things. I don't plan on becoming a regular here again, but I'm back for the time being to ask about a recent piece of evolutionary anthropology news.


According to this analysis, when the human and chimpanzee genomes are compared while including portions that hadn't previously been sequenced, their similarity drops from the commonly given 98% value to 84.7%. On the surface this seems valid, and the conclusion has been accepted by Jerry Coyne, an evolutionary biologist who is qualified to evaluate it. Jerry Coyne's post from yesterday is what brought this analysis to my attention.

But there is something odd about this conclusion: it's virtually identical to an argument made in 2012 by Jerry Bergman and Jeffrey Tomkins in the Journal of Creation. Bergman and Tomkins' 2012 argument was that when human and chimpanzee genomes are compared using data typically omitted from these comparisons, the percentage similarity drops to somewhere in the 81-87 percent range. Either the recent analysis by "Origins Unveiled" is an example of a major creationist claim being vindicated by mainstream evolutionary anthropology, or it's a very clever false flag operation by a creationist or Intelligent Design proponent, which was convincing enough for even Jerry Coyne to be fooled.

Looking more closely, I've noticed a few other possible red flags. First, the argument made by "Origins Unveiled" (and accepted by Jerry Coyne) is based on a paper published in Nature on April 9th. The exact same argument made by "Origins Unveiled"—that this paper shows the creationist figure of 81-87% to be correct—was previously made six months ago by Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture. And second, "Origins Unveiled" is a relatively new Twitter account (registered in 2024) without any identifying information, aside from that they were a were considering a Ph.D in evolutionary anthropology until they quit due to "the rampant political correctness I witnessed among professors and students in potential university programs". Some of the account's other posts include accurate summaries of evolutionary anthropology concepts, but a fair number of creationists have legitimate PhDs and have published mainstream biology or geoscience research, so the ability to accurately explain these concepts doesn't prove the account's provenance either way.

I would like some help evaluating whether the "Origins Unveiled" Twitter account is for real, and whether it's a coincidence that they've reached the same conclusion as Luskin (and also previously Bergman and Tomkins), or whether this Twitter account is being operated someone associated with the Discovery Institute who's posing as an evolutionary anthropologist. I suppose it's also possible that this account belongs to a creationist or ID proponent but that the substance of their argument is still correct. I'm aware of one other case where a creationist objection (not to the theory evolution itself, but to the way it's been presented in textbooks) turned out to be valid.

The problem with cherry picking methods of comparison to drop the similarity of chimps and humans to 85% is that the same method make gorrillas and other gorillas less related still.

This means the comparison clearly isn't useful as a demonstration of separate lineage.
Upvote 0

ICE Nativity scenes: Churches reimagine Christmas story amid deportations

You said that there was a distinction between immigrants and refugees. Trump canceled the temporary protected status of Haitians and is sending them back in February. I figured since you made the distinction, you knew something about the places where these folks were being sent back to.

It is about drawing lines, wishy washyism leads to chaos. As an American you should know, your flag has red lines.

But back to reality, the only thing I know of the place apart from the clear waters is, well, what is there to say............

the leaving was the best, but that I can say of many places.
Upvote 0

Well, off we go

Do yourself a big favour. Try to find reputable sources to back up any claims you want to make. And tell anyone who thinks to use that dismal excuse for a human being such as Miller to support anything whatsoever is only illustrating their own gullibility.
Upvote 0

Asking AI to explain Sunday observance when NT has no such command

But AI is more than just summary. AI is to use fake voices, fake images, videos and what not. Christians use AI for prayers, teachings, sermons. Where is the authenticity? Where is the heart that God desires? We worship the Lord with new hearts of flesh, and not like machines. Prayers, sermons it's not about using beautiful words, but words from a heart that fears and love the Lord.

Yes, technology is just a tool. A good servant but a terrible god, it can become easily our idol. So in sense technology is not bad, but it is the way we use it. AI however, is much much worse.

We can have a discussion, but I want a discussion with a human being, not AI
AI has many outlets, some are for pure entertainment but others can be used for critical discourse/study. the video/image content doesn't have a goal of accuracy in retelling accounts but rather is entertainment driven.

we typically know the difference quite easily. we don't watch Charlton Heston to understand who Moses was even if he is famous for dipicting him. so a measure of common sense is still needed and like any mediums we can't lump it all together and say because some things are bad then it's all bad. for example the Internet clearly has inappropriate and moral failures throughout, but that doesn't mean we should never use it. AI is not some self thinking machine with all these goals to corrupt reality. people are still controlling the content, AI is just the tool they use.

the church historically has used a lot of prewritren content for expression of worship outside of the Bible. liturgy, songs, prayer, ceremonial aspects, preaching, devotionals, meditation, etc.... the fact that we are going off a script doesn't make it insincere, certainly we can challenge these things but when I sing a favorite hymn I still need to find a place in my heart where I can personally use the hymn to give glory to God rather than just mechanically string the words together. Sometime I identify with the words so much that I find it some of the best ways to expression my deep feelings. The words and music together may be beautiful in their arrangement but those things themselves do offer worship to God, it is still through the heart not the physical (or audible) thing. no matter how melodic if there is no love, it's just a resounding gong.

certainly AI can be used irresponsibility, (so can tongues as Paul made that very clear) so we still need to critically approach these tools and ensure they are being used to edify and build the church or as a tool to love others while giving glory to God over a competing focus which indeed can be forms of idolatry, non different than any "thing". AI is has more rapid results so ifnit has a negative/positive impact that too can manifest quicker but that's not AI's problem, that's still a user problem and AI is still just a tool (regardless of how big the tool is, it's still a tool)

its also very much the future. you may reject it today but it's rapid development will force you to approach it down the road. I guarantee there will be AI translations of the Bible and AI content through the church in all aspects mentioned above. we can't just deomonize it but rather learn how it can be used still as a responsible tool. If Hitler liked apples does this mean that apples are evil and we should stay away from them? certainly not, and such a conclusion would be absurd, but is AI no different? AI doesn't corrupt everything it touches and it's still on us to critically and faithfully use it to give glory to God over "thing"
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,879,426
Messages
65,433,913
Members
276,440
Latest member
Raising Wild Saints