The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
13 Points

God exists and Creationism Vs. Evolution

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/6/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,360 times Debate No: 38557
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (128)
Votes (3)




I will display verified miracles declared un-explainable by science and fulfilled prophesy by modern events to demonstrate by deductive logic the existence of God.

I will demonstrate that the bible favors evolution of certain species but not others, and this is compliant with modern scientific understanding.


To begin, I would like to set a definition that we will use throughout this debate.

1)The Oxford English Dictionary definition of theory, Sense 1.

A Scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be general laws, principles, or causes of something to be observed.

Now that we have that straight, I will continue to make my argument in support of Evolution.

General overview

Evolution is the idea that we all evolved from one common species. It states that all life evolves according to natural selection, sexual selection, and genetic mutation. The evidence for evolution is found in the fossil record, lab experiments,and much more.

The Evidence

The Fossil Record

As stated earlier, fossils are in layers according to the geological time scale. Each layer shows a period in earths history. And you will not find a fossil outside its layer, or time. These fossils show a general path upward, from the simplest to the most complicated organisms. So what do we see in these fossils?

In fossils, we see how things evolved to what they are today. We see the evolution of vertebrates in the sea, their first steps on the land, the extinction of animals. It showed the transition from gills to lungs, that all species were and are transmutable (4).

Radiometric Dating

Radiometric dating is one of the most accurate ways to date fossils with isotopes that go back to 49 Billion years, older than the estimated age of the universe. It works by taking an isotope and its decay product and measuring the decay rates (2).

I had two images to show Radio metric dating, but am having trouble showing them here. They should the process of half lives and a list of the useful Parent and Daughter Isotopes.

The "Missing Links"

Some very important transitional fossils have been found that show very important leaps. One of which showed the rise of animals from the water to land.

In Richard Dawkins' book "The greatest show on Earth", he quotes J.L.B. Smith, a South African Biologist as he describes the fossil of a Coelacanth. I will Give the Paragraph before the description as well

"Lobefins today have dwindled to the lungfishes and the Coelacanths ('dwindled' as 'fish', that is, but mightily expanded on land: we land vertebrates are aberrant lungfish).... Smith movingly wrote of the moment when he first cast eyes on this astonishing find, to which he had been summoned by its discoverer, Marjorie Courtenay-Latimer (He later named it Latimeria), to give his expert opionion:

We went straight to the Museum. Miss Latimer was out for the moment, the caretaker ushered us into the inner room and there was the " Coelacanth, yes, God! Although I had come prepared, that first sight hit me like a white-hot blast and made me feel shaky and queer, my body tingled. I stood as if stricken to stone. Yes, there was not a shadow of doubt, scale by scale, bone by bone, fin by fin, it was a true Coelacanth. It could have been one of those creatures of 200 Million years ago come alive again. I forgot everything else and and just looked and looked, and then almost fearfully went close up and touched and stroked while my wife watched in silence...(2, pg. 163)"

The reason this fossil was so important is that it was the missing link between land vertebrates and aquatic 'fish'. Richard goes on to say that "Coelacanths are closer cousins to us than they are to most fish.. they, and lungfish, are definitely closer cousins to us than to a trout, tuna and the majority of fish (2, Pg. 163-164).

Our ancestors sprang from the ranks of lobefins and other land vertebrates as their species made the slow trek from water to land.

Lab Experiments

The Lenski Experiment

This is one of my favorite experiments regarding Evolution. Not only does it show evolution in action, but it shows that genetic mutation causes change in an organism.

For this experiment, I would like to note that all information will be coming form source 2, "The Greatest Show On Earth" where Richard Dawkins devotes an entire chunk of a chapter to this very interesting and revealing experiment.

The Experiment

A biologist and his team at an American University decided to take 12 "tribes" of E. Coli Bacteria and put them into 12 bottles filled with even amounts of Citrate and Glucose, with glucose being the Bacteria's main food source. The original 'generation' had samples removed from the various tribes and frozen, as the E. Coli. Bacteria has the very unique ability to 'come back to life' once it defrosts. Here is the procedure of the experiment.

Every day, the team would take samples of each of the 12 "tribes" and freeze one, evaluate another, and fill the bottles back up with citrate and glucose exactly the same amounts as the day before, then insert a small sample of the bacteria into each of their new habitats (which were precisely the same as before) and they would grow and populate each time. This process was repeated for almost 20 years.

The Observations

Each generation, the Bacteria would multiply to a maximum amount where all Glucose was consumed and the habitat could no longer support the population anymore. At this point, each of the tribes (usually reaching the same state at relatively the same times) would have samples taken, frozen, and evaluated. Then a small sample would be put back into a new jug with the same levels of citrate and glucose. With each successive generation being frozen, they were each tracked, so that they could be defrosted and evaluated if a question ever arose. This process was repeated over and over for a few years.

The Results

The experiment went on for twenty years, and, as Darwinian Evolution predicts, they all were able to more efficiently use the glucose in their environment as time went on. But, each population of the same bacteria were able to develop the increased efficiency by different methods! They knew this by being able to look at the difference between Generation 0 and each successive generation and the current generation. This proved that not only does genetic mutation makes beneficial modifications to the organism, but that natural selection favored the reproduction of the more efficient bacteria. This proves two of the key processes of Evolution. But wait, it gets better.

In the tribe known as Ara-3, its population plateau suddenly increased six fold compared to all other populations of the past! What happened? Why did its body size increase and its population plateau increase? The baffled biologists began to investigate.

E. Coli Bacteria cannot use citrate as a food source. It was a surprise, then, when Ara-3 suddenly acquired this ability and increased its population size per generation by 6 times the amount as it had before! After discovering "what was special about the Ara-3 tribe, Lenski and his colleagues went on to ask an even more interesting question. Was this sudden improvement in the ability to draw nourishment all due to a single dramatic mutation, one so rare that only one of the twelve lineages was fortunate enough to undergo it? (2, pg. 128)." Or was it due to slow, cumulative change that could be shown on the same graph that the Glucose efficiency increase had? It was shown that genetic mutation A along with Genetic mutation B were able to produce Genetic mutation C, the one that gave the Bacteria the ability to consume nitrate! This Cumulative selection [where multiple adaptions and genetic mutations are able to build upon each other, giving rise to complicated organisms (1)] was able to mutate the organism in such a way that it outmatched all of its fellow tribes. This was an amazing find by Lenksi's student Zachary Blount (2, pg. 130). It showed that through genetic mutations over time, the probability for the Citrate mutation seemed to be ever increasing in Ara-3. When it finally happened, the results were so that the new genetically mutated bacteria were able to outproduce and out match its fellow bacteria. Natural selection had made its choice. Darwinian evolution had been observed through our own eyes.

For lack of more space, I think it is time that I ended this phase of the argument and wished my opponent the best of luck. I look forward to his arguments!

These are the sources I will and have used through this debate.

1)Dawkins, Richard."The Blind Watchmaker. London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1986. Print.
2)Dawkins, Richard."The Greatest Show On Earth. New York City: Free Press, 2010. Print.
3)Montgomery, David."The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood. New York City: W. W. Norton & Company, 2013. Print.
4)Switek, Brian."Written in Stone: Evolution, the Fossil Record, and Our Place in Nature. New York City: Bellevue Literary Press, 2010. Print.
5)FairBanks, Daniel."Evolving: The Human Effect and Why it Matters. New York City: Prometheus Books, 2012. Print.
Debate Round No. 1


That is a good run down of evolution I do not deny the least bit. I do hold that there are species of humans planted on Earth via Alien Seed Theory and species of non-humans who are the next evolution of neanderthal, and there is both a religious and scientific basis for this.

Point 1: (Bible says)

Genesis 4:15 the Lord put a mark on Cain, lest any who found him should attack him.

Note: Cain was one of the very few on earth, logically he was surrounded by brutish neanderthals

Deuteronomy 7:3-4 Bans Hebrews from inter-racial marriage

Note: Likely to keep the True Human Genepool intact

Point 2: (Rh- Bloodtypes)

An Rh- bloodtype has no monkey genes. Scientists have observed that the highest population densities of Rh- types is Western Europe with a decreasing gradient to the Far East. It is interesting to note that several Western European Races trace their lineage to the Israelite; British, Scottish, Danish off the top of my head.


Point 3: (Neanderthals Among Us)

I conjecture that Neanderthals today are just as innately savage as they were thousands of years ago; but somewhat suppressed by the suit & tie.

We will Identify modern neanderthals by the following traits and let their names speak for savagery:
(1) short, slanted forehead, often with a massive brow-ridge
(2) head doesn't sit vertically over their body; short necks at an angle.
(3) Large gap between 2 front teeth (won't be covered here)
(4) Proportionately over-sized ears (won't be covered here)

Adolf Hitler Profile:
Joesph Stalin Profile:
Mao Zedong Profile:
Larry King:
This guy definitely ain't human:

Point 4: (Alien Seed Theory)

Famous Dutch Painter Aert De Gelder was granted access to the Vatican Secret Archives

He came out of there painting Flying Saucers:

Domenico Ghirlandaio (15th.c.) had his encounter:

World's Largest And Most Uniform Religion is a UFO Cult, what can I say?

From here on out it's just verified miracles and prophesy.


This will be an....interesting debate? I think I will just go on into human evolution than attempt to disprove UFO paintings that I am not sure should be included in a debate about God, Creationism, and Evolution. As for the Neanderthal claims, here is a picture of the Neanderthal skull compared to the Homo Sapien skull.

I will let voters decide what they want to draw from those profiles and the picture I provided.


According to source 5, "Evolution: The Human Effect and Why it Matters", "... this evidence has grown tremendously to become abundant and powerful, including data from fossils, archaeological excavation, geography, detailed anatomical studies, biochemistry, radiometric dating, cell biology, chromosomes, and massive amounts of information from DNA, especially from genome projects (5, pg. 12)."

What Mr. Fairbanks is talking about here is Human evolution. Earlier, he stated that "Use of the word overwhelming to describe the accumulated evidence of human evolution borders understatement (5, pg. 12)."

It is obvious that I will not be able to get to all the evidence he describes in his book as I only have 8000 characters left for this argument. I can, however, give a very brief description of our Paleontologists' finds around the world using a very simple graph that Mr. Fairbanks provides in his book. Unfortunately, I will only be able to describe the graph here.

The Graph

In Table 3.1, Fairbanks has listed the four groups of early Hominins.

The first group, Early Hominins, contains the Sabelanthopus tchadeni which was found in Chad, Africa, which is one of three in this first group and existed an axpromiate 7 million years ago.

The second group, Australopithecines, contains the Australoipithecus afarensis which was found in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Tazmania and existed 3.76-2.92 million years ago. Most of the fossils in this group were found in Kenya, South Africa, and Ethiopia.

The third group, the Robusts, contain 3 species, one of which is Paranthropus aethiopicus, which was found in Ethiopia and existed 2.8 million to 2.3 million years ago. Most of the fossils found in this group were found in Ethiopia, with a few found in South Africa.

The fourth and final group contains 13 species and is known as the Homo group. This group contains such icons as the Homo sapien, the Homo neanderthalensis, and the Homo erectus. The oldest of this group existed 1.9 million years ago and was found in Kenya. The species in this group are the most geologically spread out groups, starting in Keny and moving to Tazmania, then Ethiopi, Kenya, South Africa and so on and so forth until we reach the Homo sapiens, which are world wide.

I could go into detail of each of these groups, their difference between them, the meaning of their names, and the conclusions we have drawn from them.

However, I will just leave it with the fact that as we go back on the evolutionary timescale, we look more like the Great Apes of Africa than we do humans, indicating a 'recent' ancestor.

I don't think we were planted here by aliens simply because our evolution is so tied to the animals of this planet.

These are the sources I will and have used through this debate.

1)Dawkins, Richard."The Blind Watchmaker. London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1986. Print.
2)Dawkins, Richard."The Greatest Show On Earth. New York City: Free Press, 2010. Print.
3)Montgomery, David."The Rocks Don't Lie: A Geologist Investigates Noah's Flood. New York City: W. W. Norton & Company, 2013. Print.
4)Switek, Brian."Written in Stone: Evolution, the Fossil Record, and Our Place in Nature. New York City: Bellevue Literary Press, 2010. Print.
5)FairBanks, Daniel."Evolving: The Human Effect and Why it Matters. New York City: Prometheus Books, 2012. Print.
Debate Round No. 2


Found is the most primitive "human" known to man, the Philippine Aborigine: average life-span 16 years and die of old age at 27:

So yes there are primitive un-evolved humans, but I find there is miraculous evidence in the creation account of civilized man and his interaction with.

We'll look at 2 clearly fulfilled prophesies:

1: St. Malachy's Prophesy of the Popes -

In the 12th Century St. Malachy wrote a list of 112 short Latin phrases describing in succession each Pope. All of which were accurate; but the most profoundly shocking #110 John Paul II he describes as being "Of the Solar Eclipse":

John Paul II was born on a solar eclipse and died during a solar eclipse. If my math still works there is a 0.000067555% of that occurring [ 3 eclipses annually / 365 days = 0.008219178(^2) =0.000067555 ] By any means we can just say Malachy knew.

2: Revelation 12 matches perfectly with modern events, beginning with a rundown of the most relevant passages:

A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. 17 Then the dragon was enraged at the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring"those who keep God"s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus.

October 18th 1917 Virgin Mary clothed in the Sun appears at Fatima to 70,000 witnesses including Authors of the Atheist Newspaper "O Seculo" who concede it was a miracle.

October 25th 1917 Bolshevik Revolution (Red Dragon comes at the Heel of the Woman - Genesis 3:15)
i. Red Dragon had 7 crowned heads (Soviet Union had 7 Unchecked Dictators [Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, Gorbachev]
ii. Red Dragon wiped out 1/3rd of the stars from heaven (Soviet Union conquered 1/3rd of the earth)
iii. Soviet Union wages war against God's People murdering an estimated 40,000,000 Catholics.


Concerning Malachy's predictions, I have but one thing to say: Rome will not be destroyed at the end of this reign. The end of times is not upon us. Furthermore, if you would like to say Russia is the Red Dragon, than you are wrong. China would be more of a Red Dragon. On top of this, the lord says that no one will know the day or time and that it will come without warning.

On the appearance of Mary at Fatima is very very strange. But the sun dancing in the sky? You know how noticeable that would have been all over the world? That would have sent out so many solar flares it might have destroyed the Earth! That's impossible and there is a reason the visions at Fatima stopped. We invented something called the Video camera. Since then there have been no miracles.

Here is an excellent source debunking the whole claim.

Finally, I do not know how those people above describe ancient humans... Your extraordinary claim that ancient humans walk among us is unfounded and according to the current understanding of today, completely false. You would think that biologists and evolution skeptics would have descended on any of this information that you have presented about such humans. It appears, because you provide no sources leading to a more authoritative voice, that you have come to these strange conclusions yourself. You would be far more credible if you could provide sources.

All of the claims that you have made so far are baseless and unfounded in any science. Even the video that you gave me was very questionable indeed! Where was that document for a thousand years? How do we know that it was written by the saint? And why would anyone hide such a document in "secret archives of the vatican?" Also, for documents to be lost in such a small building that made such predictions is strange indeed. If they had been lost and recovered anywhere else than the vatican it might get some credibility. But it is a totally unbelievable document. It makes as bout as much sense as the endless rumors of Christ's return that constantly prove false. I guess we will see about that documents validity in our lifetime, eh? Because while he supports feeding the hungry, as any man should, I do not see him rushing food to the Africans that are starving. I do not see him doing anything any other pope has not already done.

So I challenge you now, what are your sources? Does anyone but you claim that all those famous dictators were neanderthals? Or that those people in the Philippines are ancient humans? I just want to read something about it other than a man who I know nothing about besides that he is a Devout Catholic.
Debate Round No. 3


The Aeta People:

Wiki has references to the studies of their claims; these people reach full adult age at 12 years old and are sure to die when they are 27, they can't possibly be related to civilized man who adults at 18 and peak ages at 120.

About communism, China was a satellite of the Soviet for quite some time; and for knowing the end of times, the bible doesn't actually say that we can't know the time of the 2nd coming, just that we won't know when the universe fades away:

Matthew 24
35Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.
36"But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Now about Fatima, of course 100 years later people will explain away 70,000 eye-witnesses; we see the same with Holocaust Denial. I won't defend or attack any claims; but as far as video of the event it did happen again in 2011 before a crowd in the Ivory Coast: (To see properly in the 'Original Video' you may need to tilt your laptop screen to dim sun brightness)

Malachy's Predictions are obviously an old document, can't find anyone refuting them.

So, my next exposition will be the Miraculous Image of Guadalupe (Declared the most prodigal miracle of human history)

i. Miraculously Received in 1531AD
ii. No undersketching or underdrawing
iii. Material disintegrates in 30 years but hasn't after 500 years
iv. Attempts to make copies have failed
v. Survived acids and fire
vi. Maps Stellar Constellations Unknown Until Late 20th Century In The Position They Were Aligned That Day In 1531AD
vii. Eyes of Image Demonstrate Purkinje-Sanson Law And Contain Microscopic Images
viii. Image Changes Color At Distances
ix. Image Maintains Constant Temperature Regardless Of Room Temperature


I apologize for my late response. I was not prepared for the outlandish claims of this most devout catholic believer. I believed that this would be a debate of science and Creationism Vs Evolution. I did not know that the entire debate would include only of

1) Neanderthals among us- no source
2) Primitive beings- Wikipedia with information about short lived, statutorily challenged people in the Phillipines with once again no source saying these are ancient humans.
3) UFO's in Christian art? Then a claim (in the comment section) that the debunking video (found in the comment section) was an insult to the artists saying that they meant to paint these things. However, this actually commends the artists in a way! They painted beautifully detailed faces depicting the sun and moon. They created beautiful works of art that encompassed so many stories of the bible. They were not, however, depicting Ancient Aliens... Such a strange statement.
4) He backs up his "Neanderthals" with biblical "fact" and continues to talk about the miracles at fatima and the ivory coast.... and Guadeloupe? Here's a cool link about that
5) He talks about pope predictions, and that Rome will be destroyed at the end of this "anti-pope's" reign.

For the Ivory coast Apparition, I see no reason the video should even be trusted. Moreover, if all these apparitions were true, why would god be showing himself through her? Is that some sort of proof that he exists? If all this was true, it would seem that Mary is god and not Mary is a tool of god. Nothing about the Apparitions makes sense or anything.

I accepted this debate in the idea that it would be a scientific debate mainly on human evolution. What I got was strange superstitions, aliens in ancient art, and apparitions of a dead woman.

I may be wrong. There may be a god and all atheists are dead wrong. Science can't explain everything. It's the beauty of it. It's why science exists in the first place! I honestly cannot refute the apparition at the Ivory Coast, but does that mean it is true? By no means! Just like the Apparition at Fatima, it will be debunked, just like his ancient aliens.

I loath the fact that I was deceived. The subject of this debate was god exists and creationism versus Evolution. Not "here's a bunch of videos about crap that doesn't really prove anything and certainly leaves the problem of evil open for debate. Oh dictators are Neanderthals and roses make paintings!" Good lord... (excuse the irony). I'm incredibly disappointed in this man. I thought he was a knowledgeable theologian or something close to it, given his age of 30 years old.

I obviously know a little bit about evolution and plan to learn more about it in a career as a biologist. I don't know much about this man. He's a little strange and it seems that he did this debate just to show these "miracles" which are as bout as useful to humanity as a criminal that robs and kills. Where Jesus was claimed to heal the sick and raise the dead, all Mary does is appear, dance in the sun, and be self evident proof for god. I don't even know how to argue with this superstition.

But anywho, let the voters decide about all this. My closing arguments will be more about the deception and why I make this claim, and more of my disappointment in you.
Debate Round No. 4


Hey if you can't watch asian pop music and not think the apocalypse is imminent...hell that just gave me an epileptic seizure

So my last miraculous exposition will be on the incorruptibility of holy relics:

1300 year old blood that was examined by a professor in anatomy and pathological histology as well as chemistry and clinical microscopy and it was determined that the blood is still fresh after 1.3 millennia and that no preservatives were used.

I also encourage looking into the incorruptible corpses of saints

Some of which were even put into conditions that would cause rapid decay but failed to do so.

There's your source about incorruptibles.

Look, I went into this debate expecting creationism versus evolution, which I was well prepared for. Once he said that he accepted evolution, I thought maybe we were going to discuss human evolution, so I described a graph found in one of my sources to begin that debate. But no, this man had drawn me into this debate using Creationism versus evolution as a guise for "Here's a bunch of 'miracles'. Try to debunk them."

I despise this. I loath that deception. I walked in talking science and he starts talking about aliens and Neanderthals and ancient humans and Marian apparitions. This is the same man that believes everyone but Catholics are going to hell. He calls himself wealthy and says he'll offer 7 grand to anyone who can prove him wrong.

Ladies and gentlemen, believe what you want about what I could not debunk, (by the way, I was relying on quick internet searches. It is obvious most people don't even take the time to attempt to debunk these wild claims.) But anywho, I must say that this was a most manipulative and deceptive trick to get me to discuss 'miracles'.

I close this debate by declaring his claims unfounded and fanatical views of Catholicism.

Have a good day.
Debate Round No. 5
128 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by DanielDate 3 years ago
china faked its space launches too

it has to leave you wondering why and the likely answer is man has never been in space
Posted by Sagey 3 years ago
Maybe we can give the current Guru's of the Faked Moon Landing Conspiracy Theory a ride to the moon where they can spout their theory from there.
Though I've been informed that those that will be sent to the moon, only have a one way ticket.
Posted by Sagey 3 years ago
There was still a greater bending of the knees on Jamie's clip.
This is because relative weights of the gear was less on the moon, though this could be Jamie's lack of training.
Though the Chinese have also landed craft on the moon and may be starting a moon station there soon.
This will make those conspiracy theorists feel Dumb, since for people here to have a space station on the moon, means that the original landings were more likely to have been Factual.
We won't be able to fake people living on the moon so easily.
Posted by DanielDate 4 years ago
LOL This is good:

Mythbusters purposefully botched their Apollo Experiment to make it seem the moon-landings were real
Posted by DanielDate 4 years ago
makhdoom: cmon man, this islam is easy to debunk; you're biggest mistake was accepting the Old Testament:

The "koran" in ... "Maryam 19:35" >
"It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son."
Is in conflict with and opposed to these writings of God's covenant with Abraham:
(Set aside of course ... that there is no "allah")
> Proverbs 30 -- Identification of the eternal God the Son.
> Isaias 66 -- Prophesy of the Incarnation of Christ, True God and True Man.
> Ecclesiasticus 24 -- Prophesy of the Incarnation of Christ (True God and True Man), via the Virgin Birth.
> Psalm 2 -- Prophesy of the Incarnation of Christ, True God and True Man.
> Isaias 9 -- Prophesy of the Incarnation of Christ, True God and True Man.

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Proverbs 30:4 >
"Who hath ascended up into Heaven, and descended? Who hath held the wind in His hands? Who hath bound up the waters together as in a garment? Who hath raised up all the borders of the earth? What is His name, and what is the name of His Son, if thou knowest?"

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Isaias 66:9 >
"Shall not I that make others to bring forth children, Myself bring forth, saith the Lord? Shall I, that give generation to others, be barren, saith the Lord thy God?"

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Ecclesiasticus 24:12-13 >
12: "Then the Creator of all things commanded, and said to me: and He that made me, rested in my tabernacle",
13: "And He said to me: Let thy dwelling be in Jacob, and thy inheritance in Israel, and take root in My elect."

Catholic Faith (pre-fulfillment) writing of Psalm 2:7-8 >
7: "The Lord hath said to Me: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten Thee."
8: "Ask of Me, and I will give thee the Gentiles for thy inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for thy possession."
Posted by makhdoom5 4 years ago
AL QURAN ( chapter no 4 and verses 117 to 122)

Rather than call upon Him, they call upon goddesses, and call upon a rebellious Satan (117)
upon whom Allah has laid His curse. He said (to Allah): 'I will take to myself an appointed portion of Your servants (118)
and shall lead them astray, and shall engross them in vain desires, and I shall command them and they will cut off the ears of the cattle, and I shall command them and they will disfigure Allah's creation.' He who took Satan rather than Allah for his guardian has indeed suffered a man-ifest loss. (119)
Satan makes promises to them and fills them with vain hopes, but whatever he promises them is merely delusion.(120)
For these people, their abode shall be Hell and from there they shall find no way of escape (121)
But those who believe and do good, We shall cause them to enter the Gardens beneath which rivers flow. Here they will abide for ever. This is Allah's promise in truth and whose word is truer than Allah's? (122)
Posted by makhdoom5 4 years ago
there is full detail of this,
adam indeed do not know any thing.
coz it is mention in quran.
when agels asked ALLAH why creting the human when we are here obdient never go againt ur will.
than ALLAH said say the names of some things.
and ALLAH said he already taught the words to adam.
when asked from adam he gave the asnwers.
so angels bow down the adam but devil names that time azazil rejected to bow infront of adam.
the knowledge was the based to create human.
how much human can understand own its own the reality.
but at the same time clash occur the devil become enemy.
and the war started.
human vs jins.
mud vs fire.
and since than devil deciving human let them forget those names and ALLAH always help them to remind them.
when they forget coz devil come in the form of snake and dogs.
and effecting them.
and they started making new languages.
other wise see all animals in the wole world.
has one language.
same ways.
like dog barks.
tiger roar.
and so on.
they are not test subject.
they are not suppose to to go on the extreme of understanding.
they were not created on the basis of knowing and knowledge.
as far for as there are many things proven from the same sources why i do not believe this.
this make sense.
Posted by Sagey 4 years ago
Yes Makhdoom, thinking about it, I agree, completely unnecessary!
Posted by Sagey 4 years ago
Though, at that time, they could not understand the word God,
They had no language that could describe God.
So belief in God was impossible, nobody could explain God to them.
No complex language, no way to pass message of God on to others.
One man may conceive and know God, but he could not tell another, because he had no words to use.
Such belief and teaching could not happen with no language.
No God could promise Heaven and Virgins to Adam, because Adam still would not know meaning of word Heaven, nor Virgin.
Nobody could even describe Heaven to Adam, because the concept of heaven needs complex words that did not exist in those days. Nor did those people understand Hell, because it too needs words they did not have.
No talking snake could tell Adam to eat the fruit of knowledge, because Adam would not know what the word knowledge means.
Posted by makhdoom5 4 years ago
well its kind of headache.
in my opinion its un necessary talk.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not attempt to prove the existence of God other than by quoting scripture. Evolution is how life evolved, not how it originated, and Pro granted evolution. Pro had many scientifically unsubstantiated claims, and when there is no such proof, all Con need do is deny them.
Vote Placed by 2-D 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Wow, this debate took a sharp turn round 2. Con presented a good case for evolution that does require supernatural intervention. It?s Pros responsibility to present a clear resolution and support it and failed on both. No way Con could have predicted the debate going in this direction from the poor resolution statements. Con pointed out that Pro was only making weak conspiratorial statements without reliable evidence (which was enough to refute his claims) and provided more plausible explanations for many of the claims. Sources clearly go to Con for providing reliable resources while Pro referenced suspect conspiracy sites.
Vote Placed by Projectid 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: The Con did a good job of explaining his position and did a fair job of refuting the outlandish claims of the Pro. I was not convinced by the Pro's arguments at all. As for reliable sources, I have to go with the Con, some of the Pro's sources did not seem credible or reliable to up hold is claims. Over all interesting debate, I had a good time reading it.