WP Consulting

Computer consultant, WordPerfect expert, musician, author ( Bible scholar, LDA, video editor, radio personality (

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@Carlton3ru:
𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯[?]

I said you didn’t satisfactorily answer any of the OP’s questions. You told @Slickid007:

𝘐 𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘺.

But you didn’t. Did you read my response to @xonphused’s post yet? These are the questions to which you didn’t respond, although you don’t have to post anything in response. I did. 😊

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/3]

@xonphused:
𝘈 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘯𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 2,000 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩 𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺’𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩.

𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺?

𝘞𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘦. 𝘏𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴. 𝘐𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘪𝘯.

Yes, humans have committed atrocities in the past and they continue to do so, and innocent people still suffer injustices meted out to them by others because sin is in the world, but God will soon reverse the effects of these injustices, and will resurrect those that have died as a result of such atrocities.

𝘐 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯:

𝘐𝘧 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘭𝘭-𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦, 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯?

𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦?

𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘑𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘴’ 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩, 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘥?

I do not agree with this idea of yours about ‘Christians believing that salvation is spiritual and eternal.’ I have no idea what this idea even means, but no Christian believe such a thing. I will now go on here to answer these other questions.

Our original parents, Adam and Eve, were created perfect by God, but before any children were born to them they willfully did what God had commanded them not to do, and incurred a debt that constituted an unforgivable sin against God. True to his word, God sentenced them to eternal death as a consequence.

All of Adam’s offspring has inherited the consequences of Adam’s sin at birth, and just as Adam and Eve grew old and die, so we, too, suffer the wrath of God as well, which are the consequences of God’s perfect justice, that is, the indignity and misery of having become sinners with imperfect bodies that are not just vulnerable to the common cold, but to heart disease, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, dementia, Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson’s Disease, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriatic arthritis to name just a few of the diseases that plague and affect our quality of life as we get older, as well as the knowledge that we, like our original parents, could not escape death on our own without divine help.

Without a just basis, God cannot forgive Adam’s sin or forgive our sins. If God were to reverse the death process without the payment of a ransom in satisfaction of Adam’s debt, he would be untrue to his word that “the wages of sin is death.” (Rom. 6:23) No imperfect man could satisfy this debt and deliver us from this penalty by ‘giving to God a ransom for the life of any sinner that would grant to the individual the right to live forever.’ (Psa. 49:7-9; Rom. 7:24)

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@wendelltalks https://t.co/8DDmOB663F

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@wendelltalks:
𝘈𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 “𝘐 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦.”

𝘜𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰: • 𝘈 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 • 𝘍𝘪𝘯𝘦-𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘦𝘥 • 𝘖𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘯 • 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘦

@JonHammond1701:
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯'𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘈𝘕𝘠 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴.
𝘐𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦, "𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦-𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨" 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘦, 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐𝘚 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦.

Fine-tuning is false? No; it isn’t false.

Maybe you know (or maybe not) that there are four fundamental forces of nature, right? A Gravitational Force; a Electromagnetic Force; a Strong Nuclear Force; and a Weak Nuclear Force. Referring to just the Electromagnetic Force, a slight difference in this force would affect the sun and thus alter the light reaching the earth, making photosynthesis in plants difficult or impossible. It could also rob water of its unique properties, which are vital for life. So again, the precise tuning of the Electromagnetic Force determines whether we live or not.

Equally vital is the intensity of the Electromagnetic Force in relation to the other three forces. For example, some physicists figure this force to be (10⁴⁰) times that of gravity. It might seem a small change to that number to add one more zero (10⁴¹). Yet that would mean that gravity is proportionally weaker, and a Professor of Mathematics and Physics at Oxford, Dr. Reinhard Breuer (“The Anthropic Principle: Man as the Focal Point of Nature”) made this interesting comment on the resulting situation:

“With lower gravity the stars would be smaller, and the pressure of gravity in their interiors would not drive the temperature high enough for nuclear fusion reactions to get under way: the sun would be unable to shine.” Imagine this!

What if gravity were stronger proportionately, so that the number had one fewer zeros (10³⁹)? “With just this tiny adjustment,” continues Breuer, “a star like the sun would find its life expectancy sharply reduced.” And other scientists consider the fine-tuning to be even more precise.

Indeed, two remarkable qualities of our sun and other stars are long-term efficiency and stability. Consider a simple illustration. We know that to run efficiently, an automobile engine needs a critical ratio between fuel and air; engineers design complex mechanical and computer systems to optimize performance. If that is so with a mere engine, what of the efficiently “burning” stars such as our sun? The key forces involved are precisely tuned, optimized for life. Did that precision just happen?

@TalonXavier1973:
𝘌𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘪𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘢 𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘺?

No, a resurrection by this means cannot happen. E.T. does nit and has never existed, except on the movie or tv screen or in a book.

@ThatAntiTheist1:
𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨.

I’m sorry. I understand you to be saying that all of what @wendelltalks said in his post is wrong, but specifically what exactly?

1. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯 [𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭] 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦.

To what evidence do you refer? I’m a scientist, so use as many words as you need to give me the cliff-notes.

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[2/2]

2. 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘭𝘭-𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦? 𝘜𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵, 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦.

Someone—not man—authored the anthropic principle, which includes the permittivity constant in Coulomb’s law and Planck’s constant, explains the fine tuning of our universe, and governs the natural cycles that gives to our planet the ability to support the abundance of life on it. Four questions:

Why does the permittivity constant in Coulomb’s law have the exact value of 8.85 x 10⁻¹² Coulomb per Newton-meter? Why is the electron charge to mass ratio exactly 1.76 x 10⁻¹¹ Coulomb per kilogram? Why is the speed of light 3 x 10⁸ meters per second? Why is Planck’s constant exactly 6.63 x 10⁻³⁴ Joules-seconds?⁣

3. 𝘔𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘯𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘴 𝘧𝘢𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵.

Subjective? Really? Why is it that people all over our planet share the same moral view on stealing? on murder? on lying? Tell me you intended to write “objective.”

4. 𝘞𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯'𝘴 𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘯.

We ca actually see s person’s thoughts? Are you at least 21 years of age? I ask because I don’t think an adult would say such a thing.

𝘋𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘰𝘵.

𝘜𝘯𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳.

I’m pretty sure that you aren’t smarter than I am when discussing the anthropic principle. I don’t believe there is anyone on this platform that is sporting a “look.” I mean, we can’t see it. One wonders why it was you decided to say this. Were you intending to be clever? If so, that’s fine, but please let me know that you’re not serious in the things you’ve said in your post.

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@wendelltalks:
𝘈𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺 “𝘐 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦.”

𝘜𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰: • 𝘈 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 • 𝘍𝘪𝘯𝘦-𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘦𝘥 • 𝘖𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘯 • 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘦

@JonHammond1701:
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯'𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘈𝘕𝘠 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴.
𝘐𝘵 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦, "𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦-𝘵𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨" 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘦, 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘮, 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘐𝘚 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘭𝘪𝘧𝘦.

Fine-tuning is false? No; it isn’t false.

Maybe you know (or maybe not) that there are four fundamental forces of nature, right? A Gravitational Force; a Electromagnetic Force; a Strong Nuclear Force; and a Weak Nuclear Force. Referring to just the Electromagnetic Force, a slight difference in this force would affect the sun and thus alter the light reaching the earth, making photosynthesis in plants difficult or impossible. It could also rob water of its unique properties, which are vital for life. So again, the precise tuning of the Electromagnetic Force determines whether we live or not.

Equally vital is the intensity of the Electromagnetic Force in relation to the other three forces. For example, some physicists figure this force to be (10⁴⁰) times that of gravity. It might seem a small change to that number to add one more zero (10⁴¹). Yet that would mean that gravity is proportionally weaker, and a Professor of Mathematics and Physics at Oxford, Dr. Reinhard Breuer (“The Anthropic Principle: Man as the Focal Point of Nature”) made this interesting comment on the resulting situation:

“With lower gravity the stars would be smaller, and the pressure of gravity in their interiors would not drive the temperature high enough for nuclear fusion reactions to get under way: the sun would be unable to shine.” Imagine this!

What if gravity were stronger proportionately, so that the number had one fewer zeros (10³⁹)? “With just this tiny adjustment,” continues Breuer, “a star like the sun would find its life expectancy sharply reduced.” And other scientists consider the fine-tuning to be even more precise.

Indeed, two remarkable qualities of our sun and other stars are long-term efficiency and stability. Consider a simple illustration. We know that to run efficiently, an automobile engine needs a critical ratio between fuel and air; engineers design complex mechanical and computer systems to optimize performance. If that is so with a mere engine, what of the efficiently “burning” stars such as our sun? The key forces involved are precisely tuned, optimized for life. Did that precision just happen?

@TalonXavier1973:
𝘌𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘪𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘢 𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘳𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘺?

No, a resurrection by this means cannot happen. E.T. does nit and has never existed, except on the movie or tv screen or in a book.

@ThatAntiTheist1:
𝘈𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨.

I’m sorry. I understand you to be saying that all of what @wendelltalks said in his post is wrong, but specifically what exactly?

1. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯 [𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭] 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦.

To what evidence do you refer? I’m a scientist, so use as many words as you need to give me the cliff-notes.

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@Slickid007:

𝘋𝘶𝘥𝘦 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘵𝘢 𝘮𝘺 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘥 !

Evidently, you’ve decided to pretend to not know how X/Twitter works, but I’ll pretend to be humored by your ignorance and point to @xonphused, who is the OP in the event you hadn’t noticed.

Now you are actually in 𝐦𝐲 feed, so if you haven’t anything constructive to say 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐜 in connection with the OP’s questions, I really don’t expect to get any more notifications from you in 𝐦𝐲 feed.

Now “git”!

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@Slickid007:

𝘭𝘰𝘭 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘮𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘶𝘱 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘦 , 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘱𝘪𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥 …..𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘰𝘤𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘴 !!!😷

I’m not concerned with what you may think sounds stupid since I cannot control what anyone thinks, but I had not posted a response to your post until now.

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[3/3]

@Carlton3ru:
𝘛𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵'𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴.

𝘚𝘰 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵'𝘴 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 [𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦] 𝘶𝘴 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘯, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘢 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 […] 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘴.

𝘎𝘰𝘥 [𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴] 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘴 [𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘪𝘯] 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩, 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘺, 𝘸𝘩𝘺?

1. 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘴, 𝘯𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵.
2. 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘴 [𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘪𝘯] 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦, [𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳] 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘋𝘐𝘌.

𝘕𝘰𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘦𝘳 [𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴] 𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 𝘰𝘳 𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 [𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘧𝘴], 𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘣𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵.....𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘺.

@Slickid007:
𝘎𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘴𝘬𝘦𝘥 , 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩 𝘩𝘰𝘸 𝘯𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘤𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴; 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘰 𝘪𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 .

As someone that professes to be a Christian, I will typically any and all questions that pertain to the gospel of the kingdom of God. Your anti-Christian taunt is not just false, but makes IMO what you say in your post foolish. I’m not asking, but I’m sure there are some that are reading this thread that wonder why you would make such a bombastic statement knowing that what you stated wasn’t representative of all Christians.

@Carlton3ru
𝘐 𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘴𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘨𝘶𝘺.

No, actually, IMO you 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 satisfactorily answer any of the OP’s questions; I suspect that you didn’t know how. I did notice that you paraphrased Rom. 6:23, which was good. Take a moment though and read my response to @xonphused’s post.

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[2/3]

Gratefully God provided the legal basis whereby he could justify and give to mankind forgiveness of their sins, which would free us from the penalty of eternal death. This God did by sending Jesus from heaven to be born as a perfect human, so that he could give his life as a ransom for all of Adam’s children. Jesus’ resurrection is not any victory over death for us. By his resurrection, Jesus himself was restored to life again, but by his death we have the ransom that provides atonement for the sins of those that exercise faith in its value to them by obeying Jesus.

How the ransom works can be likened to Adam’s having deprived all of his offspring of their rightful inheritance, their savings—which he did!—which resulted in his being sentenced to life imprisonment, leaving us, the innocent victims of his corruption, impoverished and destitute with no money and no way to get out of our circumstances, that is, until a kind benefactor stepped in and relieved us of our debt and restored to us our rightful inheritance.

God has arranged for Jesus to redeem us and cancel the debt of sin that Adam owed to God by having Jesus provide the ransom that “takes away the sin of the world.” (John 1:29) We have now been relieved of our debt, but we continue to be impoverished and destitute until the wrath of God comes, and our sins are purged and death is finally abolished.

Unlike Adam, Jesus “committed no sin” (1 Pet. 2:22), so that because he died with the potential for fathering a perfect human race, he could adopt Adam’s sinful descendants as his children, and make it possible for those drawn into a relationship with God on the basis of (1) faith in the value of Jesus’ ransom sacrifice, (2) getting baptized in Jesus’ name and (3) obeying him could escape God’s wrath and receive eternal life. (John 3:36; Rom. 3:24)

By our willingness to make changes in our life as we await the coming of God’s wrath, we strive to bring our lives into harmony with God’s will through ‘repentance and turning back’ from the pursuit of an ungodly course and we take appropriate action to do the things that are pleasing to God so that the sins we commit “may [finally] be blotted out.” (Acts 3:19) In the meantime, those who are baptized are freed from a guilty conscience and obtain “a good conscience” toward God. (1 Pet. 3:21)

𝘐’𝘮 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺. 𝘐’𝘮 𝘢𝘴𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘢 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘪𝘤, 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵.

𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘑𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘴’ 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮?

There’s nothing wrong with your questions, even if were your goal here to disprove the legitimacy of Christianity, but no one is expected to accept Christianity and pursue a godly course apart from a fair reading and study of the Bible. (Eph. 4:20-32) With so many things that could distract us in the world, pursuing godliness isn’t an easy thing to do. As the saying goes, you cannot know what you don’t know.

But without God’s providence in sending his son Jesus to earth so that by his death and the sacrifice of his life “as a propitiation by [Jesus’] blood for our sake his righteousness could be impugned to those of us exercising faith in the ransom, God could not demonstrate his divine forbearance in passing over former sins, and we would not be justified and would continue to die for an affliction we inherited even though our sins are by no means “like the transgression of Adam.” (Rom. 3:24-26; 5:14) Consequently, faith in Jesus and his ransom is the only means by which we can be saved.

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@xonphused https://t.co/MM02c5qAGo

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/3]

@xonphused:
𝘈 𝘑𝘦𝘸𝘪𝘴𝘩 𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘤𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘯𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 2,000 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘴 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩 𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺’𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩.

𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘦𝘹𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺?

𝘞𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘦. 𝘏𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘵 𝘢𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴. 𝘐𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴. 𝘌𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘶𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘪𝘯.

Yes, humans have committed atrocities in the past and they continue to do so, and innocent people still suffer injustices meted out to them by others because sin is in the world, but God will soon reverse the effects of these injustices, and will resurrect those that have died as a result of such atrocities.

𝘐 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘭𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨. 𝘉𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘳 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯:

𝘐𝘧 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘭𝘭-𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦, 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯?

𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯’𝘵 𝘎𝘰𝘥 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘷𝘦?

𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘧 𝘑𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘴’ 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘧𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘩, 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘰𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘥?

I do not agree with this idea of yours about ‘Christians believing that salvation is spiritual and eternal.’ I have no idea what this idea even means, but no Christian believe such a thing. I will now go on here to answer these other questions.

Our original parents, Adam and Eve, were created perfect by God, but before any children were born to them they willfully did what God had commanded them not to do, and incurred a debt that constituted an unforgivable sin against God. True to his word, God sentenced them to eternal death as a consequence.

All of Adam’s offspring has inherited the consequences of Adam’s sin at birth, and just as Adam and Eve grew old and die, so we, too, suffer the wrath of God as well, which are the consequences of God’s perfect justice, that is, the indignity and misery of having become sinners with imperfect bodies that are not just vulnerable to the common cold, but to heart disease, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, dementia, Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson’s Disease, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriatic arthritis to name just a few of the diseases that plague and affect our quality of life as we get older, as well as the knowledge that we, like our original parents, could not escape death on our own without divine help.

Without a just basis, God cannot forgive Adam’s sin or forgive our sins. If God were to reverse the death process without the payment of a ransom in satisfaction of Adam’s debt, he would be untrue to his word that “the wages of sin is death.” (Rom. 6:23) No imperfect man could satisfy this debt and deliver us from this penalty by ‘giving to God a ransom for the life of any sinner that would grant to the individual the right to live forever.’ (Psa. 49:7-9; Rom. 7:24)

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@SandersLam69990:

𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘣𝘷𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘰𝘰 𝘮𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.
True and FYI I’m also a genius. I am going to withdraw from this exchange and will repeat my earlier comment, which someone else may need to explain to you because I don’t know that you are able to understand it.

“You like to talk, but you’ve never attended college and have no degree, which is what makes it difficult for you to appreciate how foolish your pushback sounds. You clearly do not understand the things I’ve been saying to you here, which I imagine a high school graduate should be able to understand.”

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@SandersLam69990

𝘌𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘣𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺.

What makes you say this? I speak as an scientist and an academic in pointing out to you that evolutionary biology is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 the foundation of modern biology, not even a branch of science, but is a subfield of biology.

Contrary to what you have been persuaded to believe, evolution is pseudoscience at best since evolution is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 an empirically verifiable scientific theory, and is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 settled science.⁣

𝘐𝘯 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘢 "𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘰𝘳𝘺" 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘴; 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭-𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦.

But evolution is not a scientific theory.

𝘖𝘷𝘦𝘳 98% 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴, 𝘧𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦.

Over 98% of scientists believe in this fairy tale? I’ve heard you, but this is false. I’ll repeat here what I wrote in a previous post that you may still find it difficult to comprehend:

First, with respect to the ToE, it isn’t possible to observe the past. Observation is an activity that utilizes the senses to collect data in the present. We cannot use the senses to collect empirical data about past events. While it is possible to examine past events in the present, a degree of interpretation and inference will always be required to establish how such past events occurred.⁣
⁣
Second, it’s not possible to design experiments to determine what happened in the past. Controlled observations/experiments may determine whether an event is possible in a specific situation, but the exact conditions that existed in a past moment in time can never be replicated. Conclusions about the past cannot be reached through inductive reasoning. Such conclusions or explanations are made through abductive reasoning.⁣
⁣
Third, as I’ve already stated, it’s not possible to predict the past. Science predicts FUTURE events arising from certain situations based on CURRENT observations of nature. It is not used to make predictions of what happened in the past based on general observations of nature. Nor can it be used to establish the past events that led to the current observations—this would be the remit of abduction.⁣
⁣
Using the scientific method, one observes what happens and then, based on those observations, postulate a theory as to what might be true, test this theory by making further observations and by conducting experiments; observe what results to see if predictions based on the theory are fulfilled.⁣

The ToE is said to involve observed frequency changes in alleles, but these frequency changes are PRESUMED, for such changes have NOT been observed, and, as Sir Karl Popper has pointed out, that while natural selection is a testable hypothesis, the ToE isn’t subject to the possibility of empirical falsification, which means that whatever one thinks evolution to be, WHAT IT ISN’T is a legitimate scientific theory. I call the ToE narrative pseudoscience. Geology is a branch of science. Physics is a branch of science. Chemistry, Astronomy, Mathematics, Botany, Zoology and Genetics are each branches of science. Evolutionary biology is a subfield of biology, but, again, it is NOT a branch of science.

You like to talk, but you’ve never attended college and have no degree, which is what makes it difficult for you to appreciate how foolish your pushback sounds. You clearly do not understand the things I’ve been saying to you here, which I imagine a high school graduate should be able to understand. Be that as it may, below I’ve added the following remarks that were posted by @darwintojesus:

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@XCosmosOfficial:

𝘐𝘧 𝘚𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘏𝘦𝘭𝘭, 𝘸𝘩𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘳𝘶𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘳?

Satan is not being punished anywhere. Satan is no longer able to appear in heaven before God along with the rest of God’s angels since his ouster from heaven by Jesus along with his angels. (Rev. 12:7-10)

Satan has now been confined to the earth where he is doing all he can to keep as many people as possible from obtaining the real in connection with the gospel of the kingdom of God. Whatever it is you think “hell” to be, hell is gravedom, whether the dead person was interred in the ground or under the water, or was cremated. Hell is the grave, the same place where Jesus spent parts of three days before his resurrection from his tomb—his grave—by God. (Acts 2:27, 31-32)

IMO it would be wise to know what the words you use (words like “hell”) mean before using them. Becoming familiar with what the Bible teaches about sin and death, and how believing in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice benefits us would be very useful. (Acts 16:31-32)

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@SandersLam69990 https://t.co/AyDMtSS2YL

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@SandersLam69990

𝘌𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘯 𝘣𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺.

What makes you say this? I speak as an scientist and an academic in pointing out to you that evolutionary biology is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 the foundation of modern biology, not even a branch of science, but is a subfield of biology.

Contrary to what you have been persuaded to believe, evolution is pseudoscience at best since evolution is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 an empirically verifiable scientific theory, and is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 settled science.⁣

𝘐𝘯 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘢 "𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘰𝘳𝘺" 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘨𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘴; 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭-𝘵𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦.

But evolution is not a scientific theory.

𝘖𝘷𝘦𝘳 98% 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵 𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴, 𝘧𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦.

Over 98% of scientists believe in this fairy tale? I’ve heard you, but this is false. I’ll repeat here what I wrote in a previous post that you may still find it difficult to comprehend:

First, with respect to the ToE, it isn’t possible to observe the past. Observation is an activity that utilizes the senses to collect data in the present. We cannot use the senses to collect empirical data about past events. While it is possible to examine past events in the present, a degree of interpretation and inference will always be required to establish how such past events occurred.⁣
⁣
Second, it’s not possible to design experiments to determine what happened in the past. Controlled observations/experiments may determine whether an event is possible in a specific situation, but the exact conditions that existed in a past moment in time can never be replicated. Conclusions about the past cannot be reached through inductive reasoning. Such conclusions or explanations are made through abductive reasoning.⁣
⁣
Third, as I’ve already stated, it’s not possible to predict the past. Science predicts FUTURE events arising from certain situations based on CURRENT observations of nature. It is not used to make predictions of what happened in the past based on general observations of nature. Nor can it be used to establish the past events that led to the current observations—this would be the remit of abduction.⁣
⁣
Using the scientific method, one observes what happens and then, based on those observations, postulate a theory as to what might be true, test this theory by making further observations and by conducting experiments; observe what results to see if predictions based on the theory are fulfilled.⁣

The ToE is said to involve observed frequency changes in alleles, but these frequency changes are PRESUMED, for such changes have NOT been observed, and, as Sir Karl Popper has pointed out, that while natural selection is a testable hypothesis, the ToE isn’t subject to the possibility of empirical falsification, which means that whatever one thinks evolution to be, WHAT IT ISN’T is a legitimate scientific theory. I call the ToE narrative pseudoscience. Geology is a branch of science. Physics is a branch of science. Chemistry, Astronomy, Mathematics, Botany, Zoology and Genetics are each branches of science. Evolutionary biology is a subfield of biology, but, again, it is NOT a branch of science.

You like to talk, but you’ve never attended college and have no degree, which is what makes it difficult for you to appreciate how foolish your pushback sounds. You clearly do not understand the things I’ve been saying to you here, which I imagine a high school graduate should be able to understand. Be that as it may, below I’ve added the following remarks that were posted by @darwintojesus:

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@SandersLam69990:

𝘌𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯

“Evolution”? Do you have an understanding of what evolution is? I do. There no “law” of evolution within the known physical universe for Darwinists to build a realistic mathematical model upon, for the second law of thermodynamics, entropy—a law with great mathematical explanatory power in science—directly contradicts the primary Darwinian claim that greater and greater levels of functional complexity can easily be had and/or “naturally selected” for over long periods of time. Indeed, entropy's main claim is that, over long periods of time, everything in the universe will decay into simpler and simpler states until what is termed "thermodynamic equilibrium" is finally reached.⁣
⁣
In physics, entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. A system’s entropy increases as it moves from an ordered, organized, and planned state towards a more disordered, dispersed, and unplanned one. The more disorder there is in a system, the higher its entropy is.⁣

The Theory of Evolution (ToE) ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law. The ToE says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged.⁣
⁣
According to this theory, this supposed process—which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage—was formed all by itself under natural conditions. What the law of entropy makes clear is that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts the laws of physics.⁣

A thermodynamic system without an energy conversion mechanism of some sort is not advantageous for evolution, be it open or closed. No one asserts that such complex and conscious mechanisms could have existed in nature under the conditions of the primeval earth. Indeed, the real problem confronting evolutionists is the question of how complex energy-converting mechanisms, such as photosynthesis in plants, which cannot be duplicated even with modern technology, could have come into being on their own.⁣
⁣
Something is either scientifically sound or it isn’t scientific and the ToE ignores this fundamental law of physics and totally contradicts the second law and says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged.⁣⁣⁣

The ToE is a form of religion that has indoctrinated many of our children when they were in school and this is a falsehood that has become part of the belief system in many adults today. It is often defined as “allele frequencies that changes over time” by natural selection driven by common descent with modification, and that it is by means of such changes in these allele frequencies in a population over time that new species emerge.⁣ ⁣
⁣
Macroevolution/speciation has 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 occurred. No empirical evidence exists for the transitioning of whale fins into legs and the transitioning of a whale's blowhole into an adapted nose. No one has 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 observed natural selection driven by common descent with modification cause one species to evolve into another species.⁣ One evolutionist wrote:
⁣
[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@SandersLam69990 @Maximumatheist @Bevmtgl https://t.co/6soUbeKU6P

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@SandersLam69990:

𝘌𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯

“Evolution”? Do you have an understanding of what evolution is? I do. There no “law” of evolution within the known physical universe for Darwinists to build a realistic mathematical model upon, for the second law of thermodynamics, entropy—a law with great mathematical explanatory power in science—directly contradicts the primary Darwinian claim that greater and greater levels of functional complexity can easily be had and/or “naturally selected” for over long periods of time. Indeed, entropy's main claim is that, over long periods of time, everything in the universe will decay into simpler and simpler states until what is termed "thermodynamic equilibrium" is finally reached.⁣
⁣
In physics, entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. A system’s entropy increases as it moves from an ordered, organized, and planned state towards a more disordered, dispersed, and unplanned one. The more disorder there is in a system, the higher its entropy is.⁣

The Theory of Evolution (ToE) ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law. The ToE says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged.⁣
⁣
According to this theory, this supposed process—which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage—was formed all by itself under natural conditions. What the law of entropy makes clear is that this so-called natural process utterly contradicts the laws of physics.⁣

A thermodynamic system without an energy conversion mechanism of some sort is not advantageous for evolution, be it open or closed. No one asserts that such complex and conscious mechanisms could have existed in nature under the conditions of the primeval earth. Indeed, the real problem confronting evolutionists is the question of how complex energy-converting mechanisms, such as photosynthesis in plants, which cannot be duplicated even with modern technology, could have come into being on their own.⁣
⁣
Something is either scientifically sound or it isn’t scientific and the ToE ignores this fundamental law of physics and totally contradicts the second law and says that disordered, dispersed, and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA, and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged.⁣⁣⁣

The ToE is a form of religion that has indoctrinated many of our children when they were in school and this is a falsehood that has become part of the belief system in many adults today. It is often defined as “allele frequencies that changes over time” by natural selection driven by common descent with modification, and that it is by means of such changes in these allele frequencies in a population over time that new species emerge.⁣ ⁣
⁣
Macroevolution/speciation has 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 occurred. No empirical evidence exists for the transitioning of whale fins into legs and the transitioning of a whale's blowhole into an adapted nose. No one has 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 observed natural selection driven by common descent with modification cause one species to evolve into another species.⁣ One evolutionist wrote:
⁣
[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

[1/2]

@Maximumatheist:
𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘢𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘊𝘩𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘯’𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘰𝘯’𝘵 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴.

@Bevmtgl:
𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘣𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘵!! 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯! 𝘖𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘰𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘩 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘢𝘳𝘣𝘢𝘨𝘦!

@Maximumatheist:
𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘵?

To suggest that @Bevmtgl or anyone that points out to you that no evidence exists for evolution is evidence of @Bevmtgl’s not having obtained a university education makes me think you are completely unaware that the Theory of Evolution (ToE) is a debunked theory 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞, and that you are unaware that we are living in 2026 and not in 1859! There are many adults that were indoctrinated as children by the propaganda taught in our schools as part of the scientific curriculum about the ToE.

You should not be listening to people like evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, who writes “evolution takes time” to sell his books. Also, you are evidently unaware that the law of entropy debunks the ToE. Based on the shade you threw out on @Bevmtgl’s being a dropout, I’m going to take a moment to expand a bit on the ToE and entropy.

Entropy's main claim to fame is that, over long periods of time, everything in the universe will decay into simpler and simpler states until what is termed "thermodynamic equilibrium" is finally reached.⁣⁣ In physics, entropy is the measure of the disorder of a system. A system’s entropy increases as it moves from an ordered, organized and planned state towards a more disordered, dispersed and unplanned one. The more disorder there is in a system, the higher its entropy is.⁣⁣
⁣⁣
However, the ToE ignores this fundamental law of physics. The mechanism offered by evolution totally contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. The ToE says that disordered, dispersed and lifeless atoms and molecules spontaneously came together over time, in a particular order, to form extremely complex molecules such as proteins, DNA and RNA, whereupon millions of different living species with even more complex structures gradually emerged.⁣⁣
⁣⁣
According to this theory, this supposed process—which yields a more planned, more ordered, more complex and more organized structure at each stage—was formed all by itself under natural conditions. What the law of entropy makes clear is that this so-called natural process is a manifest contradiction of the laws of physics.⁣⁣

@Bevmtgl:
𝘐 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘢 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘹𝘪𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘺 𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺!! 𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘴𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘪𝘵!!

@SandersLam69990:
[𝘠𝘰𝘶’𝘳𝘦] 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴. 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦’𝘴 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦. 𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘦𝘱𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯’𝘵 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯 𝘪𝘵’𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘦.

Are you seriously of the belief that some 3.5 billion years ago homo sapiens transitioned from abiogenesis? The reality is that no one has 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 observed natural selection driven by common descent with modification cause one species to evolve into another. I say this to point out to you that the ToE is 𝐧𝐨𝐭 reality; it’s a fairy tale.

@violysis:
𝘪 𝘸𝘰𝘯𝘵 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘦𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺

You and @SandersLam69990 are of the same mind on the ToE and this is unfortunate. Natural selection was not accepted by most biologists as being the driving force of evolution until the 1930s when the new doctrine of neo-Darwinism emerged.

[cont’d]

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@SandersLam69990 @Maximumatheist @Bevmtgl @SandersLam69990:

𝘏𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘧𝘰𝘳 6,051𝘺𝘳𝘴?! 𝘏𝘰𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘵! 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘥.

𝟒 𝟎 𝟐 𝟔 𝐁 𝐂
- 𝟐 𝟎 𝟐 𝟔 𝐀 𝐃
𝟔 𝟎 𝟓 𝟏 𝐘 𝐞 𝐚 𝐫 𝐬

You do not believe the math to be incorrect, do you?

[WP Consulting @wpcguy]

@CNN @MSNOW @FoxNews

Three Promises Made by POTUS Trump. Who Gets Paid?

📌 (1) Feb. 2025
DOGE Dividend: $5,000 (per eligible household)

📌 (2) Nov. 2025
Tariff Check: $2,000

📌 (3) Sept. 2026:
Dallas Promise: $5,000 (per adult citizen)*

______
*If Republicans are able to keep both houses of Congress after the Midterm election.