A day to God is not as a day to us. In any case. I believe that we were created in God's image which means we have the ability to observe and understand God's act of creation. I think He intended it to be that way.
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Jose Fly
New member
Sooooooo.....beneficial mutations don't count if they're in certain organisms?
This is why it's pointless to show science to creationists. All they do is look for something they can use as an excuse to wave it away and not think about it.
Jose Fly
New member
Apparently you've forgotten the beneficial mutations in humans I posted to you previously. How convenient.
Ah yes, the dishonest little "heads I win, tails you lose" scenario you've set up, where if a population evolves to fit a specific environment it's a loss of variability, and if a population evolves to fit in general environments it's a loss of specificity.
Once again you demonstrate how it's impossible to advocate creationism honestly.
6days
New member
CabinetMaker.... Your interpretation is called eisegesis... You are trying to make scripture say what you want it to say, (2Cor. 4:2) rather than using clear principles of interpretation from God's Word (exigesis interpretation...Scripture interpreting scripture). In order to fit your belief system into scripture you flip the meaning of words from one sentence to the next. To demonstrate from Ex. 20 "You have six days each week for your ordinary work... For in six days the lord made the heavens, the earth, the sea, and everything in them". Your interpretation method leads to people inserting all types of heretical beliefs into scripture. For ex... why not take the virgin birth as allegorical? Perhaps the Israelites did not wander 40 years? Etc Etc.CabinetMaker said:
Also... God defined what a day was for us, before He proceeds to tell us about the six days of creation.
Gen. 1:4Then he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day” and the darkness “night.”
And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day.
From the straight forward reading of Gods Word, how can Christians fit millions of years into the Bible? Here are a few answers as to why theistic evolution and long ages contradicts scripture.
A Theologian Answers
Dr Peter Barnes, lecturer in church history at the Presbyterian Theological Centre in Sydney. He wrote: “…if God wanted us to understand the creation week as a literal week, He could hardly have made the point any clearer…. The theological argument is also compelling. According to the Bible, there was no death until there was sin. The creation is cursed only after Adam sinned (cf. Genesis 3; Romans 5:12–21; 8:19–25). This implies that all the fossils of dead animals must date from after Adam’s fall. If there was blood and violence in the creation before Adam sinned, the theological structure of the biblical message would appear to suffer considerable dislocation"
An Atheist Answers
From atheists.org/atheism
"if Adam and Eve and the Talking Snake are myths, then Original Sin is also a myth, right? Well, think about it.
Jesus’ major purpose was to save mankind from Original Sin.Original Sin makes believers unworthy of salvation, but you get it anyway, so you should be grateful for being saved (from that which does not exist)Without Original Sin, the marketing that all people are sinners and therefore need to accept Jesus falls moot.
All we are asking is that you take what*you know*into serious consideration, even if it means taking a hard look at all you’ve been taught for your whole life. No Adam and Eve means no need for a savior. It also means that the Bible cannot be trusted as a source of unambiguous, literal truth. It is completely unreliable, because it all begins with a myth, and builds on that as a basis. No Fall of Man means no need for atonement and no need for a redeemer. You know it.
A Hebrew Scholar Answers (who does not believe Genesis)
James Barr, Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University, former Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford.
"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; .. Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know.".
A Christian Apologist Answers
Joe Boot, President of Ezra Institute for Contemporary Christianity
“Since the doctrines of Creation, the Fall and Redemption stand in an absolute historical continuum, we get a distorted worldview when we play games with Genesis.
“The apologist seeks to present biblical truth with coherence. In my experience, one cannot even formulate a compelling response to classic questions like the problem of evil and pain without a clear stand with Scripture on the creation issue.
“I have never been able to see how anyone who wants to defend the faith and proclaim the Gospel can compromise the foundation stones of that defence and then expect clear-thinking people to find a proclamation of salvation in Christ compelling.”
A Prof / PhD Biblical Studies Answers
Dr. Tom Wang says "Often, people will use the old argument that we should concentrate on preaching the Gospel, rather than get distracted by ‘side-issues’ such as Creation. But if we cannot believe the record of Creation, then why believe the record of the New Creation (‘if anyone is in Christ, he is a New Creation; the old is gone, the new has come’—2 Corinthians 5:17)?”
An Historian Answers (Prof with 2 PhD's)
Dr Benno Zuiddam“God created this world in a very short period of time, under ten thousand years ago. Whether you read Irenaeus in the 2nd*century, Basil in the 4th, Augustine in the 5th, Thomas Aquinas in the 13th, the Reformers of the 16th*century, or Pope Pius X in the 19th, they all teach this. They all believed in a good creation and God’s curse striking the earth—and the whole creation—after the disobedience of a literal Adam and Eve.”
A Biologist Answers
Dr Georgia Purdom says "many Christians have compromised on the historical and theological importance of Genesis. If Adam and Eve aren’t real people who sinned in the Garden of Eden, and as a result we are all not sinners, then Jesus Christ’s death on the cross was useless. ...the*literal truth of Genesis is so important to the authority and truthfulness of Scripture. It is the very foundation of the Gospel."
Our Creator Answers
JESUS speaking*"Haven't you read the Scriptures? They record that from the beginning 'God made them male and female.'"
CABINETMAKER..... One more quote to consider from an atheist showing how compromise in Genesis leads to a compromised and easily rejected gospel...
Atheist Jerry Coyne "Like Giberson, Miller rejects a literal interpretation of the Bible. After discussing the fossil record, he contends that “a literal reading of the Genesis story is simply not scientifically valid,” concluding that “theology does not and cannot pretend to be scientific, but it can require of itself that it be consistent with science and conversant with it.” But this leads to a conundrum. Why reject the story of creation and Noah’s Ark because we know that animals evolved, but nevertheless accept the reality of the virgin birth and resurrection of Christ, which are equally at odds with science?....
It Without good cause, Giberson and Miller pick and choose what they believe. At least the young-earth creationists are consistent, for they embrace supernatural causation across the board.
This only serves to prove that what God says about Faith is true. If you have the gift of faith from God then learning to understand Genesis in light of what we have learned is no threat to a believer. If one does not have that faith then any interpretation of Genesis is worthless. You can keep your wisdom of men and will continue to rely on God's gift of faith.
Greg Jennings
New member
Evolution doesn't say that no. It says that birds came from reptiles as you say, but certainly not from snakes.
In terms of support for transitional species, look at the legless skink (lizard) species. It's a lizard with no legs, and it slithers like a snake. We can also look at large snake species, many of which still have tiny hind legs that lack much real function anymore.
We can also look at dinosaurs (therapods, specifically) to see that they have the same hip structure as birds, some had feathers, and some even had hollow bones. These are all adaptations seen only in therapods and in birds. When you add in the fact that birds appear in the fossil record around the end of the dinosaurs' reign, then it seems pretty likely that therapods were the predecessors to birds
Greg Jennings
New member
I'm afraid not, Michael.
Dear Greg Jennings,
Okay. No problem. I think there are more in the U.S., I suppose. In Yellowstone? It's like a pressure cooker with that geyser there. Old Faithful? I'm posting this out of turn and have to go back answer my previous posts. I am on Page 1171. In a bit!
God's Best For You,
Michael
How did it feel after you got baptized in water? I was baptized with the Holy Ghost twice before I was baptized finally with full immersion in water. Water just made me feel more complete and closer to God!
Praise His Holy Name!!!
Michael
Dear CabinetMaker,
I don't see how you and 6days can overlook the fact that birds and fish are more alike that birds and reptiles. Haven't you ever heard of a flying fish? Doesn't the Bible say that the fowl were brought forth from the waters? {See Gen. 1:21KJV}. Gives you more to think about. I mean, I don't believe in Evolution. I believe in God creating and changing any creations He has created!! Every element, atom, genome, proton, DNA, alterations that He'd like to make! He is the Master Chemist!! We've just learned some of what is going on in the Chemistry of the Periodic Table.
God Is Unique And Awesome Indeed!!
Michael
Shannon doesn't include a measure of meaning, so your accusation is unfounded. Feel free to quote me otherwise if you can.
God claims to have created all the diversity of life we have today without the use of common descent, and science is consistent with what God says. So you go right on ahead and believe whatever it is that blows around in your head.
Since you provided no reply, but simply repeated your claim, I let you have another chance.
First, the message isn't, technically, entirely transcribed. Part of the process includes transcription, but messages in the cell in general, and my example in particular, include transfer and transmission as well. You certainly can't reduce the process of moving information to the next generation entirely to transcription.
Second, transcription is still a form of transmission. So even if you want to make that distinction, your claim is still just plain wrong.
Dear 6days,
You bet!! They keep saying bajillions of years to everything they want to date. I think it is to deter anyone else from dating something whose age is indeterminable. I.E.: If it's 3.5 million years old, how will we date it? It's called 'let's make a guess.' This is in the best way that I can explain it.
Praise Our Lord,
Michael
Yes, PJ, but one is just a change of one word for a response. The other thread requires much more than a new word to be added or changed. It taxes the mind and heart a bit more, if you know what I mean. I knew this was going to happen quite a while back. I discussed it with the other thread's creator.
God's Best For You And Your Loved Ones,
Michael
Cabinetmaker posted:
To which 6days replied:
6days, what is it in Cabinetmaker’s post that prompted your “hopeful monster” response?
Prostituting science
Prostituting science
Prostituting science
You and 6days have this penchant for often telling us what “science says”, yet the premier science institutions in the world almost universally disagree with your claims.
6days
New member
As the atheists point out.... people who compromise in Genesis are inconsistent. If you interpret the Bible "in light of what we have learned", you are placing your own "wisdom" above God's. Its a form of idol worship.
*Have you learned that virgins give birth?
*Have you learned that someone in the grave can rise from the dead?
*Have you learned God can speak His creation into existence in six days?
*Have you learned that God can be trusted in all matters?
Michael missed a dozen or so
Michael missed a dozen or so
And you clearly need to learn too.
Michael missed a dozen or so
Michael, your knowledge of geophysics is on a par with your demonstrated (in)ability to prophesy – dead zero. Memorize the red triangles on the following chart.
And you clearly need to learn too.
- Status