Do some extremist Christians have some sort of superiority complex, they vehemently deny ?

Question

that that evolved from apes even though no-one has ever said that they did?

Do they not wish to understand the evidence before them?

'Common ancestor' is the key phrase.

Answer 1

It seams that way doesn't it? Those who think they are above all. Always looking down their noses at everybody and everything, are no better than those who do that but says they don't believe. True believers know they are nothing special, only redeemed by the Lord Jesus!

Are you saying that no one has said we never evolved from apes? Science say they have undeniable proof that we are! Others say we crawled up out of a primordial cesspool.

Can you see the evidence before you? Intelligent design!

Answer 2

Whilst I have seen a lot of evidence supporting adaption.  I have yet to see evidence supporting 'evolution' as taught in many schools, and as churned out by those whose faith is 'evolution'.  Evidence please, not hypothesis!   I challenge you to be truly as scientific as YOU claim.

I have yet to see any real evidence that proves Man has developed from a common ancestral Ape.  Just what was the thinking ability of the early Man?  Anecdotal evidence from the oldest historical records suggests Man was far more developed than many suggest.

I do accept that there are aparent genetic similarities.  Indeed we share much of our DNA with many creatures.  I've got nothing against Apes as such and insofar as I am a Christian I would have no problem believing evolution to be Gods way of making Man, if the evidence was there to prove it.

So put up the evidence or stop challenging people whose faith differs from yours. For you have to accept your beliefs are based upon you faith in an unproven hypothesis.  That is of course if you will be scientific about it.

I suspect you won't.  Nor will the many other 'Scientists' who will avidly give me a Thumbs Down without examining the evidence to the standard science requires.

Oh while you're at it, consider the evidence still in some UK text books supporting the development of the horse [Eohippus].  Some 'scientists' choose to manipulate the evidence to support their hypothesis.  Others then adopt the false 'evidence' and incorporate it into a Theory.  Yet the Theory only has validity if the original hypothesis has been properly, scientifically tested. To not test scientifically is to adhere to a faith.  THAT is science.

Whilst there is nothing wrong in adhering to a faith.  To do so in the name of 'science' is to deceive oneself.

[UPDATE] As it stands the faith 'Evolution' is contradictory to the Bible.  Evolution as a scientific theory need not contradict

if it accepts that the creatures found were indeed Man and not some underdeveloped missing link.

[UPDATE]I searched through as much as I could but failed to find what I asked for.  That is specific irrefutable tangible evidence not based on hypothesis or guess work.  If anything your link to the Flores bones backs my argument.  The existence of modern humans exhibiting the very attibutes of bones found in the region puts a big question mark over the use of said bones to support your argument.  THAT IS HARD SCIENCE.  btw I never thumbs down any attempt at proper argument.  But please provide a link to actual data that passes the true test of science not hypothesis.  Until I see it I will regard further copius postings as continued faith based circuitous argument.  Therefore wasting time I could be helping somone, or just having fun.  Stick to the hard science then make your mind up.  Do your intellect justice.  Meanwhile don't expect me to drop my scientific standards to support your viewpoint.

I recall at least one anthropological study has found modern humans with small bones and ample ability [I can't find a link yet] living in the Indonesian region.  So disease may not be the only argument to refute the hypothesis based upon the Flores bones.  Perhaps you can find that, in the interest of proving your scientific integrity.  I'm too tired right now.

btw  A Christian is a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ.  It is a black or white thing.  Individual Christians may have different interpretations on issues the Pope would no doubt agree he is no more Christian than any other true follower.

Answer 3

Yes, they have a superiority complex - though they don't mind "evolving" from a piece of mud, or from the rib of a thing made from mud.

Also they think this vast universe was made solely for the benefit of one species on one tiny planet that goes around one insignificant star in one ordinary galaxy out of hundreds of billions.

Funniest of all, they also have a persecution complex and are always whining about a vast liberal conspiracy of activist judges, even though they have a near monopoly on power in the US.

Answer 4

Yes this is true of ALL extremists. Be they Christian or Atheist.

Wesley I was with you right up to the Satanic bit. Satan is no more responsible for us then Jehova. Would not a single deity with elements of both good and bad make more sense. An all good being cannot create evil for it cannot concieve of it. A being with elements of both CAN freely act good OR evil depending on the situation therefore simplifying the whole process and making more sense.

Trueth be told I am not well versed in Satanic belief so I stand on quicksand to rebutt you but I believe I have still provided something to think about.

======================================...

Eric the Apes evolved from the primordial cesspool, and we evolved from the apes. Time is an important factor when attempting to quote science.

Base blocks of life exist within the pool, the violent nature of earth at the time struck it with electricity and life began. Unicellular beings at first evolving later to multicellular and eventually a small ferret looking creature which is the grandpappy of both human and other ape species.

Your intelligent design still doesnt float.

======================================...

Oh Al Scussi.... I am dissappointed, did you perform even a simple search before arguing that the scientific method used to prove Evolution was flawed?

View this link plz :

http://www-1.unipv.it/webbio/dfpaleoa.ht...

And if your too lazy to go searching through it here is specific items:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/rec...

Each item listed has an approximate time of death and allows the linear development of ape like to human like species development

And the greatest shame of all look at THIS link : http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects...

This illustrates just how hard we Evolutionists must fight to open your bloody eyes. Creationism cannot work, the enlightened Christian turns to guided evolution which doesnt really explain why there would be so many dead ends but whatever. Cant disprove it, but its ironic that it only formed after overwhelming evidence of Evolution.

Consider these things before refutting Evolution.

======================================...

Siylencedogood I hate to point this out... well no I dont but even Pope John Paul II accepted Evolution

http://www.cin.org/jp2evolu.html

You DONT get much more Christian then the POPE... Many different sections of the dead can form an idea of what an animal looked like. A singular bone does not give you much to go on but when you gather the information together you get a pretty definative idea of what was there.

If the Pope can accept it as trueth. Why cant you? Incidently I would also point out that if you interpret the Bible differently "man is made from dirt" Evolution coinsides as we all came from a primordial cesspool or (dirt). THIS is why the Pope can accept. He was intelligent enough to see this spin.

Think before you thumb me down.

Answer 5

If evolution is in deed a fact, then why can't we debate it openly and honestly?

What are scientists afraid we might find?

that they are wrong? That they have NO clue how evolution is supposed to work or if it ever did?

To force people to swallow a theory without allowing them the right to question even the most profound and well established theories is an insult to science itself!

Answer 6

Sorry friend, the Bible and Evolution are strictly contradictory. If you believe the Bible as God's Word you must believe it to be true, Otherwise it wouldn't be God's Word.

If you believe human scientists who also wrote a version consisting of "ever changing" truth, who wrote it without the benefit of the Holy Spirit's inspiration, then wherever there is contradiction between it and God's Word you must believe one or the other.

If you will notice by the way...the only scientific claims that squarely contradict scripture surround the idea of the origin of the universe and all life within, which "no" human being/no scientist was even around to witness. Anything they can claim regarding something that they cannot observe, and therefore cannot test is not science, but a religious observance based upon their own desires.

They dig up a 2" piece of what turned out to be a pig's jawbone with 2 teeth and claimed that being was a missing link...They find an apelike skeleton and assume it's an early human because it was different than any other ape skeleton they had found previously, or they find a person's skeleton with tools nearby and assume because it's brow ridge is heavy that it must be a neanderthal...yet even today, in the 21st Century, we have modern human skeletons in africa and asia and elsewhere, where the skulls and bones are exactly like those that are "assumed" to be ancient "versions" of man.

Instead of actually considering that this "missing link" this animal is simply an extinct species of ape, or just an abnormal ape of existsing species (Elephantiasis, Giantism, Dwarfism, etc etc.) which is highly more likely as so many animals have become extinct, or are born with mutations, or have been killed off by man, yet instead when hearing hoofbeats and thinking horse, they think zebra.

The Bible is clear...Adam, Eve...animals...plants...etc...all created by God in the 1st 6 days. If you believe that those 6 days were figurative, that is your choice, but nowhere did the Bible say that God created a glob of amino acids in an ocean of biological goo, caused the cellular blob to grow and change randomly without any purpose or cause whatsoever into a fishlike creature that randomly changed into a fishlike creature with little nubs that would hundreds of thousands of years later become legs so that randomly without any reason whatsoever that same being woud desire to make an unimaginable leap to become a land animal, and then over millenia, slowly and randomly continue to grow additiona limbs...grow scales, grow feathers, grow pits and sieves and all manner of additional traits in order to become every single multitudinous living being on earth...and then somehow finally grow into a common ancestor for humanity...who then evolved into the male Adam...and then the female Eve...has no scientific justification, other than their unwillingness to believe there is an Allmighty God responsible for their personal existence.

God said He formed Adam from the clay, and Eve from Adam's own body. He made them male and female and it was good.

You either believe God who was there, or you believe scientists who weren't.

Take Care and God Bless.