And this dude calls himself smart.
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Chance or Design (Evolution or Creation)
- Thread starter Hobie
- Start date
That's a very common superstition among creationists. Which is odd, since that's how God says life began. It was brought forth by non-living matter, He says.
You're still confused about what evolution is. It's just a change in allele frequencies in a population over time. There are some rather dramatic consequences of that fact. One of them is common descent. The origin of life, is not one of them. Even Darwin just assumed that God created the first living things.
Nope. That's just your interpretive bias twisting scriptures.
Here's what the verses actually say:
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.Then God said, “Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens.”So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so.And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. - Genesis 1:11-12,20-21,24-27 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis1:11-12,20-21,24-27&version=NIV
Barbarian observes:
That's a very common superstition among creationists. Which is odd, since that's how God says life began. It was brought forth by non-living matter, He says.
Yep. That's what he says. Denial of the fact is just interpretive bias twisting scriptures.
Notice that life is brought forth by non-living matter, as God intended. I put the part where it happens in red.
It's not surprising, if you just look around and pay attention. He does almost everything by natural means in this world. I don't know why that is so hard for creationists to accept.
That's a very common superstition among creationists. Which is odd, since that's how God says life began. It was brought forth by non-living matter, He says.
Yep. That's what he says. Denial of the fact is just interpretive bias twisting scriptures.
Notice that life is brought forth by non-living matter, as God intended. I put the part where it happens in red.
It's not surprising, if you just look around and pay attention. He does almost everything by natural means in this world. I don't know why that is so hard for creationists to accept.
Sorry, Barb, but no, that's not what it says, nor is that what the passage means.
This is what happens when you don't take the God's at His word.
Here is the Strong's entry for the Hebrew word used:
Spoiler
It doesn't mean what you're trying to make it mean.
Barbarian observes:
That's a very common superstition among creationists. Which is odd, since that's how God says life began. It was brought forth by non-living matter, He says.
Here's what the verses actually say:
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so
Notice that life is brought forth by non-living matter, as God intended. I put the part where it happens in red.
That's what he says. Denial of the fact is just interpretive bias twisting scriptures.
You'll have to take it up with the Author. He said, it, not me.
The Strong's concordance cite you just pasted in, confirms that it is. Why deny it? This is what happens when you don't take God at His word.
That's a very common superstition among creationists. Which is odd, since that's how God says life began. It was brought forth by non-living matter, He says.
Here's what the verses actually say:
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so
Notice that life is brought forth by non-living matter, as God intended. I put the part where it happens in red.
That's what he says. Denial of the fact is just interpretive bias twisting scriptures.
You'll have to take it up with the Author. He said, it, not me.
The Strong's concordance cite you just pasted in, confirms that it is. Why deny it? This is what happens when you don't take God at His word.
6days
New member
God is not non-living matter as you suggest. God is the life giver who created Adam from the dust, and Eve from Adams side.Barbarian said:
Your beliefs not only are pseudo-scientific but directly contradict what God tells us in versus such as Hebrews 11:3 "...so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible."
A change in allele frequencies is observational science. I wonder how long it will take for you to equivocate the word 'evolution' with your unobservable and unscriptural beliefs. 3..2.. 1Barbarian said:
That didn't take you long.Barbarian said:
Fallacy of equivocation: using the same word in different senses to obscure the meaning of an argument
Better is you learn about creation from The Creator and the book of Genesis. Darwin was wrong about many things and you should not put your hope in him.Barbarian said:
And this dude calls himself smart.
Yeah, well now I wish I never did since you won't shut up about it.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
| And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. |
| And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. |
So much for the "Christian" Darwinist's common ancestry rubbish!
Life that was brought forth from the waters has no common ancestry with life that was brought forth from the earth, inasmuch as THE WATERS ARE NOT THE EARTH. Here, in these verses, we have no less than TWO, DISTINCT elements (if you will) of origin. Also, you add a third element:
So much for the "Christian" Darwinist's common ancestry rubbish!
But, Darwinist thought is, indeed, a common ancestor to much stupidity--the stupidity you're promulgating being no exception.
The funny thing is (if I'm not mistaken), the Darwinists who do not profess to be Christians, and who openly scoff against Christ/The Bible/Christianity/Christians.....these guys have, perhaps, even less respect for the folks who, like The Barbarian, try to sell this idiotic "theistic" evolutionism, than they do for creationists.
So, that's what you mean by "evolution"? For a dandelion to be brought forth out of the dirt in my front lawn is for the dirt to "evolve into" that dandelion?
It's rich to hear you call the literal interpretation of the Bible's history, "just interpretive bias twisting scriptures".
Here's what Guyver said, in a post which YOU "Thanked":
In other words, the Bible does NOT teach that fish are ancestors of humans, nor that water is an ancestor of humans.
Well, at least you admit, here, that God, in Genesis, said something that is not what YOU are saying.
6days
New member
You are correct. Atheists often scoff at the illogical theology of theistic evolutionists.7djengo7 said:
For example... Biologos is an organization that claims they are attempting to harmonize Christianity with common ancestry beliefs. They have often been mocked by atheists who seem to understand they destroy the gospel. One blogger asked them "Do you ever get tired of tying yourself into a pretzel trying to ignore obvious logical implications, and to keep others from noting them?"
Or, from an Atheist magazine "It becomes clear now that the whole justification of Jesus’ life and death is predicated on the existence of Adam and the forbidden fruit he and Eve ate. Without the original sin, who needs to be redeemed? Without Adam’s fall into a life of constant sin terminated by death, what purpose is there to Christianity? None"
Except He didn't:
Then God said, “Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens.” So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:20-21 NKJV
Genesis 1:20-21 NKJV
Looks like you got lied to again.
You're still confused about what evolution is.
Nope. Evolution is the idea that all living things are descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection. That is what is being challenged. When you've learned to respect the conversation, perhaps you can become a sensible and even useful part of it.
Nope. Evolution is the idea that all living things are descended from a universal common ancestor by means of random mutations and natural selection. That is what is being challenged. When you've learned to respect the conversation, perhaps you can become a sensible and even useful part of it.
Some hostile atheists fear the notion that God and His creation are compatible.
So do some hostile Chrisians, who have even less justification for believing so.
And so they find common cause against Christians who believe God and His creation are compatible. Hence their common hostility against Biologos. Most Christians and most atheists are not threatened by such understanding.
So do some hostile Chrisians, who have even less justification for believing so.
And so they find common cause against Christians who believe God and His creation are compatible. Hence their common hostility against Biologos. Most Christians and most atheists are not threatened by such understanding.
Right Divider
Body part
I really like how the literal translations of the Bible, LITV and YLT, record the verses related to creation. The following is from the YLT(Young's Literal Translation).
The plain reading of the verse says that within a 24 hour period that all plant life appeared on earth. There is an evening, and there is a morning--day third.
Once again the scriptures make it plain that only one 24 hour period elapsed: and there is an evening, and there is a morning--day fifth.
Once again the scripture only allows one 24 hour period to elapse: and there is an evening, and there is a morning--day the sixth.
I have one more comment on the creation of man and Darwinists. God said let us make man in our image and after out likeness. Well, to the theistic evolutionist God was once an ape and came out of sludge somewhere by nothing other than chance. In other words, the theistic evolutionist worships a very non-god-like God.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
May they not, in some instances, perhaps, even like to depict themselves as wearing halos?
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
1. "Hostile" to what, exactly?
2. Only some, and not all, "hostile atheists"?
What, exactly, are you accusing creationists of believing, and of having "even less justification for believing"?
You don't even believe in God's creation; you're a Darwin cheerleader. That's why you go about railing against Bible believers, a.k.a., creationists, for being creationists.
Ever heard of the controversy called "creation VS. evolution"?? Guess which side the creationists are on. That's right: the creation side. And you make it your personal ministry to mock and deride creationists/creationism. Guess which side that puts you on. That's right: you're on the side AGAINST CREATION. You're on the side called "evolution"--the nonsense side--alongside all whom you call "hostile atheists".
Perhaps the following is what you meant to say:
Last edited: