creation vs evolution

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
re the 'title'
It means that the thing was already here before it was formed and shaped and filled as we now have it.

The expression 'tohu wa-bohu' has to do with the destruction of something evil. There are no other details.

God has been doing other things in the universe before man. Deal with it. I'm not talking about aliens in the Hollywood movie sense. But that there are other beings in the heavens and angels and demons before our earth and mankind story comes along.

The secular world always has a useless rendition of the same creatures.

Your homework does not resolve for me whether the passage is about the local system (the local solar, or galaxy, system). There is light there before our sun is there, as you know.

God did not call the previous good. It was called 'formless and void'. He called the fixing of all of it very good. Nor did he call the demons good; they were constrained or confined elsewhere until their captain was allowed to bring them.

btw, demons were good angels before they revolted, too.

I don't think this is the place to discuss this further, 6Days, when people who are not believers are trying to get their basic questions answered. You have a lot of good material on that.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
6days said:
Actually the grammar is clear that you are wrong, and that there was nothing before day 1.*
Something interesting in the Hebrew to help confirm that...
I'm going to use Young's Literal Translation to show this, since most translations don't properly reflect an important nuance.
Genesis 1
8 ....day second.
13 .... day third.
19 .... day fourth.
23 ....day fifth.
31 ... day the sixth.

In the Hebrew, these are called 'ordinal'numbers.
But... Why is Day 1 not an ordinal number...IE. Why doesn't the Hebrew call it 'the first day'? or, 'day first'?
Again Youngs Literal translation says this...
Genesis 1:5 "and God calleth to the light `Day,' and to the darkness He hath called `Night;' and there is an evening, and there is a morning -- day one."



"Day one"... not, 'first day'. This is significant because it is now a 'cardinal' number in the Hebrew.
There was no other days before this time. And, it was so far thee only day. There was only that one day.... Thus the cardinal number is apt.

Also of course significant in this verse is that God Himself defines what a days is...a period of darkness and light; one day. One rotation of the earth...one day.


*You always repeat that as if it means something. In all ancient literature...and in the Bible...and even in much modern literature, the author starts with an overview then fills in details later.*


Ha... not quite. I'm simply defending what God says "In six days God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them". You are saying tbat isn't true, aren't you? You seem to think the heavens and earth pre-existed.*





And.....??? We could discuss that if you think that pertains to God's Word plainly says.*



* People who reject Genesis as a critical foundation to the Gospel often believe in aliens.*

To believe in aliens you seem to believe in an illogical God...who put life in the universe which He says was created after the earth. You *then seem to believe that these aliens suffer from first Adams sin but are eternally lost, since salvation is possible because of what Last Adam did for us... the descendants of first Adam.*



The belief in aliens makes sense from a Godless evolutionary worldview; in that if life came from non life on earth, it likely happened elsewhere. However that belief is inconsistent with scripture.*



No...*

For in six days, God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them.





When does God say He created principalities and powers?
His Word tells us "For in six days God created the heavens and the earth and EVERYTHING in them". Interplanner.... you seem almost heretical in your thoughts of adding time, creatures in chains, and all types of other unbiblical ideas into God's Word. The created (now demonic?) creatures in the verses you refer to surely were not part of the creation God called very good.
Click to expand...





I thought the reason for putting *s in a piece of writing was to direct us to footnotes.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
6days said:
Normally yes. :) However for some reason when using my cell phone at TOL, I get asterisks inserted everywhere... and I have had different phones, but same problem.
Click to expand...



OK.

Have you noticed that I have no problem with the 6 normal days. No problem at all. I'm talking about the number of Hebrew commentaries that say that that grammar on 'Now the earth was...' means a pre-existing condition, and the several structural examples do the same thing, like 6:11 about the pre-existing condition before God's actions there.
 
6days

6days

New member
Interplanner said:
re the 'title'
It means that the thing was already here before it was formed and shaped and filled as we now have it.
Click to expand...

Your belief about that, is contradicted by Scripture and the Hebrew grammar of Genesis 1.
Interplanner said:
The expression 'tohu wa-bohu' has to do with the destruction of something evil.
Click to expand...
No, you are mistaken. Tohu wa-bohu means empty and formless. The earth was empty of living things and did not yet have the features of oceans, continents, mountains etc.


Interplanner said:
God has been doing other things in the universe before man.
Click to expand...
Your belief contradicts God's Word. The universe was created from nothing, and over the course of a few days...for man. There was no pre-existing earth.

Interplanner said:
....there are other beings in the heavens and angels and demons before our earth and mankind story comes along.
Click to expand...

Rather than trust God's Word, you keep adding your contrarian beliefs. God's Word says nothing about demons before the earth and mankind. From the straight forward reading of God's Word, it would seem the angels were created early in the six days of creation. It would also seem that Satan fell after the 7th day since God declared everything was very good at that point.

Interplanner said:
Your homework does not resolve for me whether the passage is about the local system (the local solar, or galaxy, system). There is light there before our sun is there, as you know.
Click to expand...

God's Word should resolve it for you, but unfortunatwly you lean on your own understanding.*

Ex. 20:11 " For in six days the Lord made (asah)Heaven and Earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested on the 7th Day"

Nehemiah 9:6 "Thou art Jehovah, even though alone; God has made (asah) heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host(angels?) the Earth and all the things that are thereon, the Seas and all that is in them, and thou preservest them all; and the host of Heaven worshippeth thee."

DID YOU CATCH THAT?

*Note also that 'asah' and 'bara' are used interchangebly in scripture.
Interplanner said:
(God) called the fixing of all of it very good (in Gen. 1:31)
Click to expand...

That must be in Interplanners translation? I can share with you how other translation teams worded it if you are interested? There is nothing about fixing anything broken in the creation account.
 
oatmeal

oatmeal

Well-known member
Jonahdog said:
Wrong, and actually proteins, just as a chemical structure are more complicated than DNA. So, a little more study might help you frame your arguments.
Click to expand...

Wow, is that all you have?

Well, if you are right, big deal. If you look at the complexity of a single cell animal, your proteins are simple.

Neverless, I see you failed to scientifically support the wild guess that one genus "evolves" into more complex genus.

Has your scientific community evolved an amoeba into a frog? or a frog into a cat?

No, and they never will.

Thus, there is no experimental proof for the wild guess of evolution
 
J

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
oatmeal said:
Wow, is that all you have?

Well, if you are right, big deal. If you look at the complexity of a single cell animal, your proteins are simple.

Neverless, I see you failed to scientifically support the wild guess that one genus "evolves" into more complex genus.

Has your scientific community evolved an amoeba into a frog? or a frog into a cat?

No, and they never will.

Thus, there is no experimental proof for the wild guess of evolution
Click to expand...

It appears that only creationists demand an instant evolution from science, which, goodness, you are correct has never happened and you are right no scientist ever will turn a frog into a cat. If that is what you need to accept evolution, well, enjoy your ignorance.
 
6days

6days

New member
Jonahdog said:
It appears that only creationists demand an instant evolution from science, which, goodness, you are correct has never happened and you are right no scientist ever will turn a frog into a cat. If that is what you need to accept evolution, well, enjoy your ignorance.
Click to expand...
Actually..... You might have seen the thread on rapid adaptation. Evolutionists seem to ignore the evidence of how rapidly organisms can adapt to changing environments using their pre-existing genetic information, and mechanisms. Evolutionists seem to ignore the evidence that adaptation / natural selection results in a loss of genetic variation... It is the opposite direction of what their belief system requires.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
6days said:
Your belief about that, is contradicted by Scripture and the Hebrew grammar of Genesis 1.
No, you are mistaken. Tohu wa-bohu means empty and formless. The earth was empty of living things and did not yet have the features of oceans, continents, mountains etc.


Your belief contradicts God's Word. The universe was created from nothing, and over the course of a few days...for man. There was no pre-existing earth.



Rather than trust God's Word, you keep adding your contrarian beliefs. God's Word says nothing about demons before the earth and mankind. From the straight forward reading of God's Word, it would seem the angels were created early in the six days of creation. It would also seem that Satan fell after the 7th day since God declared everything was very good at that point.



God's Word should resolve it for you, but unfortunatwly you lean on your own understanding.*

Ex. 20:11 " For in six days the Lord made (asah)Heaven and Earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested on the 7th Day"

Nehemiah 9:6 "Thou art Jehovah, even though alone; God has made (asah) heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host(angels?) the Earth and all the things that are thereon, the Seas and all that is in them, and thou preservest them all; and the host of Heaven worshippeth thee."

DID YOU CATCH THAT?

*Note also that 'asah' and 'bara' are used interchangebly in scripture.


That must be in Interplanners translation? I can share with you how other translation teams worded it if you are interested? There is nothing about fixing anything broken in the creation account.
Click to expand...




That's what you do with things that are 'tohu wa-bohu.' It is a beautiful picture as well.


re there was no pre-existing earth...before it existed. That wasn't the question, the question was the implication of 'already' in the grammar when placed parallel to the other passages structured the same way (the several examples in Genesis). There is a reason why 2 Pet 3 says the general heavens 'existed' and the earth was 'formed.' Formed was not what you use to have clay show up out of nowhere or from the digs down by the river, but what you do with a wet pile. He also makes a distinction about time there (long ago vs more recently). Why say that if "that world" that was deluged was the formed one?

Elsewhere in Peter we see that rebellious and condemned beings were imprisoned in 'blackest darkness' which may connect to why the earth was already formless and void.

The reason for referring to the general light of day 1 vs the sun of day 3 is that I'm not aware of v16 being read retroactively (as though speaking of day 1) and so there is some other kind of light. He may have lighted things miraculously for that day. It is not likely in the normal sense of the text; I see no other 'miracle' short-cuts such as giant bananas on the same day those trees existed. It is possible he did not make our solar system until day 3 in a normal reading of the text, even though this dark mass was already there and lit somehow...

You need not worry about some backdoor to evolution with me; it is simply a sick 19th century racist myth.

But you are not a very precise thinker. I know Ex 19 requotes these things as a summary statement; it lumps them together. that does not answer time-distinctions that are in the 'word of God.' Be careful of identifying yourself as the word of God instead of as a student of.
 
Last edited:
J

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
6days said:
Actually..... You might have seen the thread on rapid adaptation. Evolutionists seem to ignore the evidence of how rapidly organisms can adapt to changing environments using their pre-existing genetic information, and mechanisms. Evolutionists seem to ignore the evidence that adaptation / natural selection results in a loss of genetic variation... It is the opposite direction of what their belief system requires.
Click to expand...
Well first, there is a difference between rapid adaptation and the demand that experiments are able to turn frogs into cats in support of evolution, as requested by oatmeal.
Adaptation can occur quickly but whether it is due to "pre-existing genetic information" (whatever you mean by that) or not is questionable.
Your claim that evolutionists ignore certain evidence is worthy of giggles coming from someone who ignores any evidence that does not fit with your need to shoe horn science into a Holy book. You ignore the evidence of the age of the universe and age of the earth and the evidence contained in the fossil record. All because of your fear of the deity described in your particular religious text.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
The uniformitarians ice core science is as flawed as climate change 'science' today--kind of for the same reasons. I heard the author today. The other interesting thing about the lower cores is the evidence of 'loess' or dusty, sandy snow. As expected it is at the bottom of the cores and tapers off, as the Genesis cataclysm and short ice age would indicate.

https://answersingenesis.org/age-of...ediments-and-ice-cores-orbital-tuning-method/
Click to expand...





Jonah,
you will find it more productive to interact with Dr. Hebert, and I'd like to hear what you think.
 
J

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
Interplanner said:
Jonah,
you will find it more productive to interact with Dr. Hebert, and I'd like to hear what you think.
Click to expand...

since he starts his scientific inquiry with the AiG statement of faith, anything he writes is not worth my time.
I think he is wrong, and I dont have to read what he wrote to come to that conclusion.
 
CherubRam

CherubRam

New member
Jonahdog said:
since he starts his scientific inquiry with the AiG statement of faith, anything he writes is not worth my time.
I think he is wrong, and I dont have to read what he wrote to come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

You never have answered my question. If there is such a thing as Evolution, then how come the oldest living life forms never evolved?
 
CherubRam

CherubRam

New member
The missing links are missing because life did not evolve in this Universe.

Isaiah 43:10. "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD (Yahwah), "and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am He. Before me no god formed, nor will there be one after me.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Jonahdog said:
since he starts his scientific inquiry with the AiG statement of faith, anything he writes is not worth my time.
I think he is wrong, and I dont have to read what he wrote to come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...




Nonsense. I guess I was lucky coming in half way through the audio presentation. It was all about the number of reasons why models are worthless about the lower layers, just as climate models are worthless today.

Jump to the middle and dive in.

Like Newton, a person can have faith and do great science.
 
J

Jonahdog

BANNED
Banned
Interplanner said:
Nonsense. I guess I was lucky coming in half way through the audio presentation. It was all about the number of reasons why models are worthless about the lower layers, just as climate models are worthless today.

Jump to the middle and dive in.

Like Newton, a person can have faith and do great science.
Click to expand...

OK, and I am sure you base that position on your extensive scientific background, not just on the thoughts of some wackadoodle AiG "scientist".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top