Creation vs. Evolution

[alwight]

That is a very naïve belief promoted by evolutionists. Evolutionists have sort of made their god to be 'selection'. Their god 'selection' is omnipotent waving a magical wand selecting who lives and who dies. But selection is a process that generally causes a loss of genetic variation... the opposite of what evolutionism hopes for.

What is a "critical mutation"? 6days don't you want to tell me?
Why on earth would non-beneficial attributes be more likely to be naturally selected for than beneficial ones?

Natural selection is something that is real. But instead of being all powerful it is weak with limitations. It SOMETIMES...on SOME mutations works on the genic level but invariably fails at the genomic level. Selection simply can't select from the hundreds of new mutations added to each generation, or humanity would cease to exist.

Hogwash.

"Negative frequency dependant selection is one of the few forms of natural selection that can act to preserve genetic variation,most forms of natural selection lead to the loss of genetic variation*as unfit alleles are "weeded out" of the population.
http://www.uic.edu/classes/bios/bios101/Selexio.htm

Bovine scatterings, quote mining from some apparently arbitrary unattributed university paper doesn't impress me 6days.

That is the belief system upon which evolutionism rests. But its a false belief.
One reason that particular 'logic' does not work is that even so called "beneficial" mutations usually, and possibly always are a result of a mutation destroying pre-existing genetic. For example a mutation could destroy the specificity of an enzyme, allowing a beneficial outcome. Loss of information again is the opposite of what evolutionism needs.
Another reason your belief fails is that the rare mutation that causes a beneficial outcome is only one out of hundreds of deleterious mutations. Our genome is crumbling at a much higher rate than selection can keep up with. Geneticists are concerned about high mutational burden..... Not a single one thinks that mutations with a beneficial outcome is going to save the human race.

When you win your Nobel Prize then I might believe you actually know some of what you're talking about.

The evidence is consistent with God's Word. We were "wonderfully made" but live in a fallen world where death, pain, and suffering exist. As Christians we look forward to that time when He shall wipe every tear, and death no longer exists.

:yawn:

 

[iouae]

There are lists on atheist websites of apparent Biblical contradictions. Most of the points on these lists show childlessly simple reasoning...as if they can't understand literature. There are actually some interesting points though. I would suggest that you get someone to pick ONE thing they think is a contradiction and have them defend that one point. (Keeps you on track). But often you end up debating atheist theology..... They are determined to believe there are contradictions, and logic isn't their friend.

Here I was thinking The Duke was reading his Bible critically, every night before bed.

Does the site give the "right" answers?

 

[gcthomas]

I would suggest that you get someone to pick ONE thing they think is a contradiction and have them defend that one point.

Here's a trivial one I Googled earlier. Which answer is correct?

How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?

A. Forty thousand (I Kings 4:26)
B. Four thousand (2 chronicles 9:25)
C. Both of the above at the same time.

 

[Hedshaker]

There are lists on atheist websites of apparent Biblical contradictions. Most of the points on these lists show childlessly simple reasoning...as if they can't understand literature. There are actually some interesting points though. I would suggest that you get someone to pick ONE thing they think is a contradiction and have them defend that one point. (Keeps you on track). But often you end up debating atheist theology..... They are determined to believe there are contradictions, and logic isn't their friend.

Hello 6,

Have you ever thought about having a go at the Easter Challenge For Christians.

I've tried to follow threads about this on other boards in the past, but must admit, I usually get lost in the details after a few dozen pages.

Maybe it's just me but I always find trying to swim the murky waters of Christian apologetics a little eye glazing. If only it was nice and simple like brain surgery or rocket science.

Still, could be interesting project for anyone who enjoy that sort of torture.

 

[alwight]

There are lists on atheist websites of apparent Biblical contradictions. Most of the points on these lists show childlessly simple reasoning...as if they can't understand literature. There are actually some interesting points though. I would suggest that you get someone to pick ONE thing they think is a contradiction and have them defend that one point. (Keeps you on track). But often you end up debating atheist theology..... They are determined to believe there are contradictions, and logic isn't their friend.

I could list a great many possible contradictions, and to every one no doubt some apologist somewhere has valiantly tried to explain it all away.

My pet one however is this:
From a simple reading of the four Gospels is it possible to conclude if:
a) Jesus remained totally silent before Pilate?
or
b) Jesus spoke many words on his own behalf?

 

[6days]

Here's a trivial one I Googled earlier. Which answer is correct?

How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?

A. Forty thousand (I Kings 4:26)
B. Four thousand (2 chronicles 9:25)
C. Both of the above at the same time.

Very good As I said... there are some interesting points that can be made about apparent contradictions, and that is one. Your point "C" is incorrect though in that we don't know what the time frame was. It may be that the numbers differ from the beginning to the end of his reign. But atheist sites only consider answers that confirm their beliefs.

While it is easy to find such points on sites that attack God's Word... it is also easy to find possible answers such as this...
"According to the King James version, Solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots but he had 4,000 stalls for his horses and his chariots. In other words, Solomon had 40,000 stalls for horses, but he had 4,000 stalls that would fit his horses and chariots. Am I stretching this explanation too far?

According to the Webster’s 1828 dictionary, (the dictionary that best explains KJV words) the word stall can be for one horse or it can be a stable of ten horses. In other words: King Solomon had 4,000 stalls and in each stall there was one chariot and ten horses. This would have meant that Solomon could have had 40,000 stalls for horses and had 4,000 stalls for horses and chariots.

Once again the Bible proves to be without error. For further reading about this alleged Bible contradiction see the following links.

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/...-stalls-horses-did-solomon-have-4000-or-40000

http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/40000-or-4000-in-1-kings-426"http://youthapologeticstraining.com...mon-have-bible-contradictions-05-episode-317/

 

[6days]

I could list a great many possible contradictions, and to every one no doubt some apologist somewhere has valiantly tried to explain it all away.

My pet one however is this:
From a simple reading of the four Gospels is it possible to conclude if:
a) Jesus remained totally silent before Pilate?
or
b) Jesus spoke many words on his own behalf?

That is one that seems easy to understand...there is no contradiction accept in the minds of those who try prove the Bible wrong. You could get into the Hebrew wording and meaning from the prophecy, but a simple explanation is...
"To prophesy that the Suffering Servant “opened not His mouth,” is to use a Hebrew idiom and hyperbolic expression which means that Jesus refrained from giving an exhaustive legal defense on His own behalf. During much of His affliction and oppression He was completely silent (cf. Matthew 26:62-63; 27:12-14). At other times He spoke only a few words—none of which comes close to being the kind of defense He could have offered on His own behalf had He been trying to avoid persecution and crucifixion"
For the complete answer see http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=1437

 

[6days]

Here I was thinking The Duke was reading his Bible critically, every night before bed.

Does the site give the "right" answers?

Ha..... No but correct answers are not hard to find if we start from the viewpoint that God's Word is correct...rather than the opposite.
Example list from an atheist of apparent contradictions
http://infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html

Good answers can easily be found... You might have your own favorite sites, but here are a few.
https://carm.org/introduction-bible-difficulties-and-bible-contradictions

http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b08.html

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=40

 

[Lon]

It's time for another round of "spot the contradiction"


Is the god of the bible honest?
Well judge for yourself:

In many places, such as Hebrews 6:18 it's obviously stated that God is incapable of lying.
In many other places, such as 2 Thessalonians 2:11 it's obviously stated that he lies.

Juvenile.

Are the commandments binding?
Well judge for yourself:

In many places, such as Ecclesiastes 12:13 it's obviously stated that the good old stuff still holds.
In many other places, such as Ephesians 2:15 it's obviously stated that now we can forget about them.

In the land where 'context' and 'meaning' are king, you dwell in the land of 'what I want to believe.' lain:

Do we have free will?
Well judge for yourself:

In many places, such as 2 Timothy 1:9 it's obviously stated that our fates are given long before we are even born.
In many other places, well honestly, I wasn't able to find any references for us having "free will". That's very strange indeed.

Since agnostics debate the matter, too, it isn't really a point of tension between an agnostic and theist, nor after the same goals and considerations.

 

[Lon]

I could list a great many possible contradictions, and to every one no doubt some apologist somewhere has valiantly tried to explain it all away.

When we take time to address the inane and shallow, sure.

My pet one however is this:
From a simple reading of the four Gospels is it possible to conclude if:
a) Jesus remained totally silent before Pilate?
or
b) Jesus spoke many words on his own behalf?

Sorry you are such a simpleton?? :think: First question, how many times was he brought before Pilate? We'll both likely think the other a fool on this one. Since you have no horse in this race your answer doesn't really register with me. THAT'S why atheist websites still purport this stupid stuff, it matters to you, not for context, but for the jeer. Such has a whole other reason for discussion in Christian concern circles. And thus, the twain shall likely bump, but never actually meet. Both are quite ignorable to the other. Yours (plural), however, is nothing but quite dishonest agenda (meaning 'discredit is the only reason it exists). lain:

atheist sites only consider answers that confirm their beliefs.

Yep, "why be honest or academic when shallow and glib get the job done," you are correct.

There the stables are, and proven to exist, and they want to argue about #'s :noway:

 

[6days]

What is a "critical mutation"? 6days don't you want to tell me?

Why not ask a geneticist... or send a letter to the editor of science journals that discuss a "critical mutation"?

Example: A critical mutation in both WT1 alleles is not sufficient to cause Wilms' tumor. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7875294

I simply used the phrase meaning a mutation that likely prevents an individual from having children, or limits the possibility. All of us have thousands of mutations causing a loss of fitness, yet we still can reproduce.

Why on earth would non-beneficial attributes be more likely to be naturally selected for than beneficial ones?

Your question makes no sense, but I will try answer what I think you are getting at.


The vast majority of mutations are not "selected for" at all. Selection is disrupruted but noise..... it can't detect and weed out anything but the most critical mutations. (Mutations that limit reproductive probability. And since deleterious mutations far outnumber the rare one that has a beneficial outcome, there is a overall loss of fitness. (Genetic burden)

Natural selection is something that is real. But instead of being all powerful it is weak with limitations. It SOMETIMES...on SOME mutations works on the genic level but invariably fails at the genomic level. Selection simply can't select from the hundreds of new mutations added to each generation, or humanity would cease to exist.

Hogwash.

Ok.... You don't understand mutations? It disagrees with your belief system?
What I said IS correct.

"Negative frequency dependant selection is one of the few forms of natural selection that can act to preserve genetic variation,most forms of natural selection lead to the loss of genetic variation*as unfit alleles are "weeded out" of the population.
http://www.uic.edu/classes/bios/bios101/Selexio.htm

Bovine scatterings, quote mining from some apparently arbitrary unattributed university paper doesn't impress me 6days.

Ok.... You don't understand natural selection? It disagrees with your belief system?
What they said IS correct.

(ad hominem is generally done by those who don't understand the subject matter, so attack the source rather than the actual argument)

That is the belief system upon which evolutionism rests. But its a false belief.
One reason that particular 'logic' does not work is that even so called "beneficial" mutations usually, and possibly always are a result of a mutation destroying pre-existing genetic. For example a mutation could destroy the specificity of an enzyme, allowing a beneficial outcome. Loss of information again is the opposite of what evolutionism needs.
Another reason your belief fails is that the rare mutation that causes a beneficial outcome is only one out of hundreds of deleterious mutations. Our genome is crumbling at a much higher rate than selection can keep up with. Geneticists are concerned about high mutational burden..... Not a single one thinks that mutations with a beneficial outcome is going to save the human race.

When you win your Nobel Prize then I might believe you actually know some of what you're talking about.

(ad hominem is generally done by those who don't understand the subject matter, so attack the source rather than the actual argument)

The evidence is consistent with God's Word. We were "wonderfully made" but live in a fallen world where death, pain, and suffering exist. As Christians we look forward to that time when He shall wipe every tear, and death no longer exists.

 

[Lon]

Have you ever thought about having a go at the Easter Challenge For Christians.

Type in "synoptic gospels" and "Easter" in a Google search.

It quickly brings up the time-line that I'm not really hung up about a guy, now atheist, who couldn't do it when he was supposed to (it is a part of the curriculum in many) in Bible college. Or didn't he go? :noway:

The atheist then gives 'his understanding' or rather lack-there-of as if that is the end of the matter. Of course it is for him, I'm not impressed by assertion and will always prefer to do my own work, especially when 'agenda' is clearly behind James Cameron opening tombs with cameras rolling. lain:

 

[Lon]

Correct, I don't know who wrote it and I don't pretend that I do. The general scholarly opinion is that G. John was written many decades after the events and probably had more than one author, well after disciple John's death.
I realise that you want to believe that John son of Zebedee wrote it, but your belief doesn't make it so. You have no more knowledge than I do who actually wrote it.

But much more vested interest, especially over 'higher' so-called critics lain:

Owning an actual Bible is hardly the point unless you think some kind of magical power emanates from a book. You are apparently convinced even before you read it and accept it lock stock and barrel without question, uncritically and credulously.

As if incredulous and so-called 'higher' critical were a virtue? :nono: Skeptics can, and often are, just as inept, if not more so because of their stubborn refusals, blind assertions, and unfound[able] accusation.

Not me however. When I read it I want to be convinced by the words or it can simply be rejected, something you apparently are not able to even contemplate.

Worse, you are 'stuck' there.

There are many different English versions of the Bible (28?) all of which can be instantly accessed from the Bible Gateway. Which one is your favourite Michael, or do you have one of each?

Neither here nor there. He was saying "your vested interest" isn't on the same par. I agree with him.

 

[Lon]

Please, Hedshake, Wight, and Duke, don't reply. I write simply to show others that 1) you repeat the same tired old canards and don't really care at all for answers, just your own agendas and 2) so that those who care can see you are all 3 self-willed and dishonest rather than open to discussion. There is no vested interest in the quote mining other than to post uncritical juvenile accusation. The rest of us, who actually care, can look, see reasonable solution, and move on. We, after all, have actual vested interest in the topic rather than dishonesty (I assert again none of you have done this homework, but googled without an ounce of academic integrity, or concern for the truth (not one of you choose to research for yourselves).

 

[6days]

Hello 6,
Have you ever thought about having a go at the Easter Challenge For Christians.

Barker has been answered MANY times by MANY people. However atheists continue to believe he has somehow stumped everyone.
Here is one of the answers..... "Interestingly, it should be noted that the fact that Barker asks for “exact” details about a day in ancient history that happened almost 2,000 years ago speaks loudly of the legitimacy of the resurrection story. Since no other day in ancient history could ever be examined with such scrutiny. Historians today cannot tell “exactly” what happened on July 4, 1776 or April 12, 1861, but Christians are asked to give the “exact” details of Christ’s resurrection? Furthermore, these requested details can be (and have been) supplied by the Gospel writers—without contradiction. Let’s examine the evidence...."
http://www.apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=294

 

[alwight]

That is one that seems easy to understand...there is no contradiction accept in the minds of those who try prove the Bible wrong. You could get into the Hebrew wording and meaning from the prophecy, but a simple explanation is...
"To prophesy that the Suffering Servant “opened not His mouth,” is to use a Hebrew idiom and hyperbolic expression which means that Jesus refrained from giving an exhaustive legal defense on His own behalf. During much of His affliction and oppression He was completely silent (cf. Matthew 26:62-63; 27:12-14). At other times He spoke only a few words—none of which comes close to being the kind of defense He could have offered on His own behalf had He been trying to avoid persecution and crucifixion"
For the complete answer see http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=1437

I think if you check 6days I asked for a simple reading of the gospels, what answer would you deduce after a simple reading of all of them?
Of course your response is to obfuscate, lead me off to the actual meaning of the supposed original Hebrew (anyway the gospels were more probably written in Greek) and then off to apologetics and spin doctors, what chance has an ordinary disbeliever got? Do I need a decoder ring? :idunno:

 

[alwight]

Why not ask a geneticist... or send a letter to the editor of science journals that discuss a "critical mutation"?

Example: A critical mutation in both WT1 alleles is not sufficient to cause Wilms' tumor. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7875294

I simply used the phrase meaning a mutation that likely prevents an individual from having children, or limits the possibility. All of us have thousands of mutations causing a loss of fitness, yet we still can reproduce.



Your question makes no sense, but I will try answer what I think you are getting at.


The vast majority of mutations are not "selected for" at all. Selection is disrupruted but noise..... it can't detect and weed out anything but the most critical mutations. (Mutations that limit reproductive probability. And since deleterious mutations far outnumber the rare one that has a beneficial outcome, there is a overall loss of fitness. (Genetic burden)



Ok.... You don't understand mutations? It disagrees with your belief system?
What I said IS correct.

Ok.... You don't understand natural selection? It disagrees with your belief system?
What they said IS correct.

(ad hominem is generally done by those who don't understand the subject matter, so attack the source rather than the actual argument)



(ad hominem is generally done by those who don't understand the subject matter, so attack the source rather than the actual argument)

The evidence is consistent with God's Word. We were "wonderfully made" but live in a fallen world where death, pain, and suffering exist. As Christians we look forward to that time when He shall wipe every tear, and death no longer exists.

We both know you are simply making it up as you go along 6days. lain:

 

[alwight]

But much more vested interest, especially over 'higher' so-called critics lain:


As if incredulous and so-called 'higher' critical were a virtue? :nono: Skeptics can, and often are, just as inept, if not more so because of their stubborn refusals, blind assertions, and unfound[able] accusation.

Worse, you are 'stuck' there.



Neither here nor there. He was saying "your vested interest" isn't on the same par. I agree with him.

Thank you for all your opinions Lon, please consider them filed appropriately. lain:

 

[6days]

We both know you are simply making it up as you go along 6days. lain:

We both know genetics does not support evolutionism... yet you believe.

There is a reason no geneticist claims natural selection is making us more fit.... The evidence shows genetic burden. We are becoming less fit. "Relaxed" selection pressure is a silly answer some evolutionists provide, but even if you step up the pressure like Hitler did, the human genome will continually decline. Evidence supports the Biblical model... We were wonderfully made but live in a fallen world where death, pain and suffering exist.

 

[alwight]

So did Jesus remain silent when tried by Pilate or did he make a nice speech?

Simple question should have a simple answer surely?:idunno: