pomegranate

Joined

• started 35 topics
• posted 1,285 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by pomegranate

• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  And who exposed these fraudsters? Hint: It wasn't Creationists

  1. If the evolutionary evidence is SO STRONG, then why would anyone attempt to make "truth" by fraud?

  2. So, evolution is true because evolutionist's expose each other as frauds?
• 
  35

  Kangaroos and the Fossil Record

  by Gedanken in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  creationists like to attack evolution by attacking the "fossil record" as being incomplete; i.e., if something existed, for example, transitional states, then we should see evidence of them in the fossil record.

  so, their argument is that if something existed, then we should see it in the fossil record.. let's take a look at the case of kangaroos.

  we must assume, if we accept the notion of a global flood, that noah collected two kangaroos for his menagerie in the ark.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  bttt

  Edited by - pomegranate on 29 October 2002 18:43:47
• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  related specifically to pomegranate's dishonesty.

  Oh really? And what dishonesty was that?

  I read an article by a reknowned evolutionist, that goes basically like this:

  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,

  "In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation."

  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,
  Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true, Evolution is true,

  The End.

  One someone writes about the truth of evolution and then defies his own article by stating a FACT that goes CONTRARY to what he is writing about, then the writer is the one that wrote out of context and all I did was expose his INCONSISTENCY.

  The fact is by the above statement from Mr, Ridley is this: The fossil record DOES NOT support evolution, which is why HE STATED PLAINLY no "REAL" evolutionist (of all schools of thought) use the fossil record as proof of evolution. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T and HE knew it and stated it in PLAIN ENGLISH...

  So Gedanken, do you agree with your mentor or not?
• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Still, no explaination. What about the wing? Anyone? Anyone at all?
• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Explain the eye.
• 
  116

  Can any believer answer this?

  by LucidSky in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it was the point i decided to become agnostic.

  i found my final stumbling block in my search for god.

  i asked (myself as well as others): why would god create carnivorous animals before sin?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Do you think God INTENTIONALLY letting his Son be sacrificed was GOOD? Or BAD?

  In reality, it's BOTH, with the eventuality of ALL BAD being done away with. It's BAD because Jesus HAD TO DIE. It's GOOD, because like FOOD, his death would then give life.

  Did that go against his purity? Obviously not.

  The WHOLE biological entity of the earth is good and bad. Who made the tree of good and bad in Eden? God.

  Here's the bottom line, God can call something bad GOOD if He wants, and you have no say in it. Not only can he call something bad as good, he can transform bad into good IF THAT BE HIS WILL.

  A few "Bad" things that God called Good:

  Lot, Moses, David, Elijah, Elisha, Saul/Paul, Peter, Matthew...etc, etc, etc...

  As an illustration, all of the above people's lives above could be likened to let's say and iron axe head trying to float in water after being thrown in. An iron axe head obviously cannot float. It will surely sink to the bottom on trying to SWIM on it's own. As a matter of fact, we are ALL like iron axe heads trying to swim...we cannot do the impossible, as it is quite impossible for an iron axe head to float on it's own never mind swim...so we sink

  But, there is a special "branch" that can be thrown into the water that will make iron axe heads DEFY the Law...

  Jesus is the branch, death is the Law. The axehead? It's your life, which is not your own:

  2 Kings 6:4-7
  They went to the Jordan and began to cut down trees. 5 As one of them was cutting down a tree, the iron axhead fell into the water. "Oh, my lord," he cried out, "it was borrowed!"
  
  6 The man of God asked, "Where did it fall?" When he showed him the place, Elisha cut a stick and threw it there, and made the iron float. 7 "Lift it out," he said. Then the man reached out his hand and took it.
• 
  63

  Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

  by Gedanken in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  jrizo in a thread of mine on kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by alanf:.

  alanf: pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live.

  evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  I have THOROUGHLY researched it and it comes up short.

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  The eye. Let's talk about THAT for a bit eh?

  A careful examination of the eye discloses that a majority of the members of the animal kingdom have eyes which, in a number of ways, are very different among the various major types. How could even one eye make itself, much less hundreds or thousands?

  The eye is a very complex and remarkable biological structure, yet evolution will teach you that the eye suddenly appeared fully-developed, and fully-functioningnot once, but at least three times: in the squid, the vertebrates (animals with backbones), and the arthropods (insects).

  "My last doubt concerns so-called parallel evolution.. Even something as complex as the eye has appeared several times; for example, in the squid, the vertebrates, and the arthropods. It's bad enough accounting for the origin of such things once, but the thought of producing them several times according to the modern synthetic theory makes my head swim." *Frank B. Salisbury, "Doubts about the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution, " in American Biology Teacher, September 1971, p. 338.
• 
  11

  Enigma Listeners?

  by santacruzchick in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  does anyone listen to enigma?

  i recently started listening to a few of the songs, i love the song gravity of love , all of the songs are so relaxing

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Return to Innocence
• 
  116

  Can any believer answer this?

  by LucidSky in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it was the point i decided to become agnostic.

  i found my final stumbling block in my search for god.

  i asked (myself as well as others): why would god create carnivorous animals before sin?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Are you saying that God made the animals to eat each other?

  There is ONE place without question, where one can surely see for themselves that God created with full intention for one life to prey on another and it be GOOD.

  The Ocean.

  Sharks NEVER ate grass (or seaweed), Big fish ALWAYS ate little fish right from the beginning of their creation. Corals little tiny grasping hand ALWAYS swooped in LIVING plankton for it to feed on. It CAN'T go anywhere as it is plastered to a rock...so it has to grasp at the plethora of miniscule living things that are whisking by with the tide. Look at the lobster or the crab, do you really think the crushing apparatus they have been gifted with in their mighty claws was for anything other than CRUSHING to oblvion the rock hard shell of sea bottom living crustaceans, so that that could dine on the tender inner defensless flesh? The ocean is the greatest example of the life eating life free for all that God MADE into existence.

  If God did not create a physical world in SEEMING "unfair" disarray that WE CAN SEE, you would never know that the invisible world was in an ABSOLUTELY UNFAIR disarray,not caused by the Creator of Life, but caused by the god of confusion.

  God has given us a vivid picture of the INVISIBLE heavens by portraying those SAME very conditions in the VISIBLE physical realm below.

  That's what I believe.

  Edited by - pomegranate on 29 October 2002 9:21:20
• 
  116

  Can any believer answer this?

  by LucidSky in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it was the point i decided to become agnostic.

  i found my final stumbling block in my search for god.

  i asked (myself as well as others): why would god create carnivorous animals before sin?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Just so it be known, I do not subscribe to a trinitarian belief. Nor do I subscribe to monotheism.

  I believe in ditheism, meaning there are TWO beings who are both God in nature, THEY are the Holy Spirit.

  Two beings of God (Father and Son), ONE God nature (Both). ~I and the Father are one.~
  
  ~in image and likeness~

  Two beings of man (male and female), ONE Man nature (Both) ~The two become one flesh~