Having said that, before I read your comment Albeto, I came back on to ask for the thread on here that presents the best arguments for evolution. I am wanting to read it. I'm just hoping it's not fifty pages long lol.

I don't see how. This is how it's seen from our perspective. The theory seems as if you have enough time, anything will happen. Give it enough time and humans will evolve to be able to live forever.

How did the brain evolve? It couldn't think in the beginning, yet it thought to make itself. :confused1: :mellow:

(Just so you know, I'm quite lighthearted about this conversation..) I am starting right back at the beginning of the evolution vs creation debate because I believe it is very simple to look at it that way. I have a good imagination, I'm creative, and yet I cannot picture the scenic progression of evolving species coming and going from plant, animal, to human, and having none of the inbetween half-people still with us today. Even with taking in the millions of years. Even a child knows that you can have all of the pieces of a microwave oven, put them in a box and shake, and that won't make a microwave oven. And that microwave oven won't go on to make babies. And that's even having all the pieces there already, not having them come from nothing. Then there is the universe itself. Somehow it's a fluke that humans are here, in our "developed form," with our earth, moon, and sun all in the perfect placemeant and ratios to each other. Fluke. Luck. Hmmm. The sun and moon appear the same size in Earth’s sky because the sun’s diameter is about 400 times greater, but the sun is also about 400 times farther away. (FYI I do believe that the earth is old.)

http://www.msdietforwomen.com/beating-ms-without-medication-is-possible I can put you into contact with Danelle if you are interested.

My friend was cured of MS. I'll go get you a link for her story. In her case it was caused by a root canal.

Sure. Or just some common sense, and having a look at the world around us.

Why can't they just fix it then. Argh. I do appreciate the layout of the new syllabus online. It's easier to look at than the 300 odd pages of the old one. (Especially when you don't have a hard copy.)

This could be asked of evolution. We have millions of apes. Millions of people. Where are the millions of inbetween species? And why dont we have any historical documentation from people from the past of these half-people?

I don't believe that he only speaks to Jews today in terms of personal revelation. But that the oracles of God were to Jewish people. The whole bible was penned by Jews, and it is a complete book not needing corrections or additions to it. (I don't believe that Luke was a Gentile as some claim.)

Within my own situation, I believe that my children have a much better foundation than I did growing up. I was in church and also attended a Christian school, but my parents left off their own spiritual responsibilities at home, and trusted the school and church to do what they should have been doing as parents. My children have a far greater knowledge of scripture than I did even as a young adult, and they also see real relationships with God modelled because we are in the word daily (almost) and pray together. (Not just on Sunday's.) They are a real part of our church fellowship, and don't just attend somewhere and get ignored because they are children.

I speak with a lot of Christian brothers and sisters online who are without a church and aren't sure what to do. This is not an uncommon situation for the days in which we live. God knew it would become like this, and he has tried to prepare us for it. In the sincere cases, it's not that Christians today don't want to attend a church, but it is because of their experiences and convictions that they can no longer go along with what their fellowship has become. One way to break it down is to list what your convictions are. What things are enough to break fellowship over? And what things can you disagree with, but still be around? The best advice that I have heard for those without a church is to start one. (However I think you really need the man/husband to have this on his heart to do.) Give it to God in prayer. Let him lead likeminded believers into your life. Fellowship is necessary, but we aren't to go along with heresy and compromise. God knows our situation and he isn't going to force us to go to a church, especially when it is the Holy Ghost convicting us against it. I'm believer who is not attending a church as this point in my life because I believe that our option of the local church would do us more spiritual harm than good. I'm left wondering what perspective my children will grow up without a "church" if one doesn't come up soon. But I know that I am trusting God in my situation, and that my husband and I are giving them a very strong foundation. We are blessed to have a few Christian homeschooling friends in their life as well, and we do fellowship with our saved family and friends when we can.

Do you believe that mankind is going to evolve into a superior form?

I have a book that I can hold and read that tells me everything I need to know, about the physical and spiritual, from start to end. God wrote it. Mere man could accomplish no such thing. It's extrodinary evidence, yet so easily tossed aside and overlooked. Eg. Mere men could not prophesy that Israel as a nation would be reborn and exist again today. No other religious text can prophecy like the bible does. No other book was formed the same way as the bible with multiple "authors" not working in collaboration. The proof is in the pudding. The pudding is in the book. Mankind reject the book. Mankind reject God. As I said earlier, it's a spiritual battle. And there's not much point even discussing this if you're an atheist as your life is quickly ticking down and you don't have much longer until you die and know no more forever (as you believe.) You're really wasting precious time just being on this thread. And I don't mean that in a mean way or a judgmental way. I'm being blunt and honest. Sure. But really, that would be my perspective if I were an atheist.

The only problem is that Joseph Smith was an American and not a Jew. The oracles of God were trusted to the Jewish people only, so Joseph is out of the running. 1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (Romans 3)

So you choose to trust in men to describe the 'actual mechanics of evolution' and you believe in it as a fact. I trust in God. You trust in men. I'm only stating this not to state anything new to you, but because I want emphasis on the fact that you are relying on men for your information. Mere humans. Failable humans. Humans who like to choose what they believe because of convenience. You trust it to such a degree that you are overlooking what is around you, and not using your common sense. You exist, yet "you" is not proof to you that you were created. You just somehow came to be. From nothing. And from no designer.

Yet you have the problem as an atheist of having all of this around you, but no reason for it. It bewilders me how anyone can believe that male and female gender just evolved at exactly the same time to reproduce with each other. You have so much proof, yet you can't see what's surrounding you because you are determined the world made itself from nothing, because you don't want there to be a God. In response to the first part of your comment, God always takes care of his own, but you are only looking at it physically, in the here and now. You have no eternal or spiritual perspective.

Half reading it wrong. Innocent people being harmed is a result of sin, and living in a world where the devil is doing a good job at harming people. Christians are harmed all the time too. God allows it for reasons beyond the individual's own situation. I was referring to two groups. One is said to have God as their Father. The other has the devil as their father. If you are not of God (unsaved), you are condemned already the Bible says. (John 3:18) God is not there to answer your prayers unless you get saved and he has mercy on your soul. 43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (John 8) Sin = death. And even in this life there are consequences for sin. Innocents get caught in the cross-fire all the time. It's spiritual warfare.

At the moment, the 'god of this world' is the devil. Satan is allowed a short time to have this earth, and to go and deceive people. It's a spiritual war that is allowed for a short time. Soon it will all be over. 'In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.' (2 Corinthians 4:4) You may be familiar with the story of how Satan leads Jesus up the mountain and tempts him. He offers Jesus all the kingdoms. The reason why he can do this is because for now, they are his. 'Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.' (Matthew 4:8-9) Of course, God is in ultimate control. But he has this setup going on for his own reason. His own wisdom is behind it. It's for an example unto all of creation, and all of the Angels in heaven. And if you are God's, he does care about you, and can protect you. If you are not God's, you are the devil's property.

Thanks, I really appreciated all the comments. I'm laughing at Ellie's comment still. And I've been given a few new things to think about. Besides getting some of my own frustration out over it.

Same here, that's how it was for me when I read it.

Thankyou for the replies. I think I just got to the point where reading it started to do my head in. When I had read it, I thought that there should have been a comma here: 'Through responding to and composing a wide range of texts, and through the close study of texts,...' However then the rest of the sentence didn't make sense, like regentrude said. I feel better if it is grammatically correct. (I'll have to trust you on that, as it doesn't sound right to me.) Mainly because it is representative of the highest level of English teachers that we have here in Australia. (I am assuming the best of the best English teachers got together and wrote it, either way, it still represents them.) I am a little more forgiving of the other subject areas. I am currently trying to get my head around the syllabus, and the easiest way that I have found to get around this educese/educationese (?), is to underline the keywords and then make my own notes into a simplified version to go off.

.. 'Through responding to and composing a wide range of texts and through the close study of texts, students will develop knowledge, understanding and skills in order to:' My grammar skills are not what they ought to be, but even I recognize that something is wrong with this sentence. 1. Please confirm that I am right in this (otherwise I am a goose for starting this thread!) 2. Please fix it! The reason why I am annoyed by this sentence is because it is the main sentence for the new NSW Australian Curriculum for English, and it is repeated five times to introduce the five main objectives of study. This is the link for anyone interested: http://syllabus.bos.nsw.edu.au/english/english-k10/content-and-outcomes/

I nearly did the same thing a few days ago. The student book is listed before the TM so it comes up first and catches your eye :) So glad I realised as I am ordering from Australia and the postage is more than the student book costs.

I don't have a Kindle, only the Kindle app. Like Arcadia, I was also wanting something that didn't need the wifi on. I think that Andrew's reasoning to have an electronic dictionary was to save the child's time and frustration in having to look things up. Previously I really wanted hard copies as well. And maybe I'll end up doing both. I also remembered that because I'm Australian I better pay attention to which English I'm purchasing :) How do we determine what is the best dictionary to buy in terms of quality of definitions? Are they all equal these-days? Is it best to get the most modern one?