The Missing Links in the Fossil Record

[6days]

Prior to the Adventist visions by their "Prophetess", almost all creationists were Old Earth creationists.

You are willfully ignorant as you have been corrected many times before, but refuse evidence that contradicts your idolatry of self and evolutionism. The majority of early church fathers, all the way back to Paul, wrote against old earth ideas, and various forms of evolutionism

http://www.oldearth.org/spurgeon/spurgeon.htm

You are forgetful. I thought you were embarrassed last time you used Spurgeon as a source of truth because he said "In all its bearing upon scriptural truth, the evolution theory is in direct opposition to it. If God’s Word be true, evolution is a lie"

Not one of them (Moses, Jesus, Paul and the majority of the early church fathers) preached YE creationism.

You have been proved wrong on that several times in the past.

Jesus preached the Bible, which explicitly rejects the "life ex nihilo" claims of your modern revision.

You are wrong about that too. Jesus referred to humanity from a time near the foundations of tbe world, and "the beginning of creation".

And as you know, St. Augustine, when he showed the creation account to be a parable...

If You want to trust Augustine as your source of truth, instead of accepting the authority of God's Word "Unbelievers are also deceived by false documents which ascribe to history many thousand years, although we can calculate from Sacred Scripture that not 6,000 years have passed since the creation of man". (From Augustines's 'City of God')

 

[Stripe]

You get angry and lose the ability to think rationally, when your assumptions are challenged.

Nope.

My assumption is that the Bible means what it plainly says, unless there is good reason to say otherwise.

The Bible says "six days" and "the whole world."

You say "billions of years" and "local flood."

We ask for good reason to believe as you do, but you never provide anything rational.

You just vomit up the same nonsense over and over — as 6 has just explained.

Let God be God and do it His way, then you won't feel compelled to get verbally abusive whenever someone doesn't agree with you.

God bless you and keep you.


Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app

 

[The Barbarian]

The Bible says "six days"

So you're saying parables are literal history. I get that. But like most Christians, I don't accept that new idea.

and "the whole world."

The flood story doesn't say the "whole world." You added that to make it fit your new ideas. And even if it did...

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

So in this case, the Bible used "all the world" to mean the Roman Empire. If there was a literal flood, and there is some reason to believe so, the evidence shows that it covered an entire region.

 

[The Barbarian]

We've kind of gotten off the track. The OP isn't about whether the new doctrine of YE creationism is better than traditional Christian doctrine.

It's about the supposed lack of transitional forms. So perhaps the YE creationists can put their heads together and show us a few pairs of major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitional forms.

Let's see if they can find any.

 

[Stripe]

So you're saying parables are literal history.

Nope.

The flood story doesn't say the "whole world."

Genesis 6:13-21
And God said to Noah: "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the Earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the Earth. Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be 300 cubits, its width 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits. You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark — you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. And you shall take for yourself of all food that is eaten, and you shall gather it to yourself; and it shall be food for you and for them."​

SURPRISE!

And if you don't like that, you're going to hate this:

2 Peter 3:3-7
Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior, knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying: "Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation." For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the Earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the Earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgement and perdition of ungodly men.​

You ignore scripture to make it fit your new ideas.

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. So in this case, the Bible used "all the world" to mean the Roman Empire.

You've been caught again, Blablabarian. Might pay to not quote scripture any more.

The Greek work used there, oikoumene, is also used in passages such as: Luke 21:26; Romans 10:18; Revelation 16:14; Hebrews 1:6 and Matthew 24:14. Are you going to insist that God's judgement will only apply to a "region"?

Heck, it should have been obvious from the passages I presented that the flood and the coming judgement apply to the same thing, ie, the whole world.

But wait, there's more!

The word used in Luke is not the same one that was used in 2 Peter, which referred to the kosmos being destroyed in water. Can anyone guess how often kosmos is used to describe a "region"? :chuckle:

For those interested in a rational inquiry, here is an outline of Biblical useage.

If there was a literal flood, and there is some reason to believe so, the evidence shows that it covered an entire region.

:darwinsm:

That's not even possible without also flooding the rest of the world.

View attachment 26034

Physics is not your strong point, is it?

Also, there are numerous details in the Genesis account that make it absolutely certain this was no localized event.

We've kind of gotten off the track.

That's not surprising given that you will do anything to avoid a rational discussion.

 

[iouae]

We've kind of gotten off the track. The OP isn't about whether the new doctrine of YE creationism is better than traditional Christian doctrine.

It's about the supposed lack of transitional forms. So perhaps the YE creationists can put their heads together and show us a few pairs of major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitional forms.

Let's see if they can find any.

Trilobites are a dominant group of animals from the very beginning or Cambrian.

If evolution were true, these Arthropods which look like aquatic cockroaches or woodlice would have to first evolve all of the following traits of the Arthropoda.
1) multicellularity
2) bilateral symmetry (two halves of body mirror images)
3) cephalisation (nerves concentrated in a head)
4) a skeleton (and an exoskeleton would in the process of evolution leave evidence since these skeletons are hard)
5) a haemocoele or body cavity, possibly with blood and circulation
6) legs
7) a three sectioned body (like insects, hence name TRI-lobite)
8) eyes and other sense organs concentrated in the head
9) a through gut meaning one which starts at one opening (mouth) and ends at another.
10) ability to move about, swim, scavenge etc.

All the above are considered advanced evolved traits, especially compound eyes.
Yet all these advanced traits (still found in most animals today) happened in the blink of a geological eye.

And this is but one animal from the Cambrian explosion.
Christians should embrace palaeontology and point to the Trilobite as an example of an "advanced" animal which was there right from the beginning with no missing links leading up to it.

You don't even have to believe in the Cambrian explosion. The next time an atheist puts down your religion, just ask him how trilobites originated so suddenly during the Cambrian, from next to nothing? Put him on the defensive.

There were many explosions during almost all of the fossil record. Because there was nothing except tiny sponges etc. in the Precambrian, and suddenly there are Trilobites, the Cambrian explosion best illustrates how life, through the ages, explodes into being in different forms, at different times, certainly at the Creators bidding. God created back then, and at various times he recreated.

The explosion of modern mankind's civilisations, starting at Sumer a few thousand years ago, is another example of an explosion which cannot be explained by evolution. Why were there not a continuous build-up of human civilisations before Sumer? Why is it that the only really accurately recorded civilisations only go back thousands of years, not millions? Human history jumps from stone axes and cave paintings to truly modern civilisation right from the beginning, in Sumerian. Why? Because when Adam and Eve were planted on earth, there was an explosion of humanity, starting in the fertile crescent at Sumer.

 

[Hawkins]

He could have created a "creature fairy" to poof each of them into existence. But that's not what He did. If you look at nature deeply enough, it becomes clear that He uses simple and efficient means to make it work.

Which is why He used evolution to make the diversity of life on Earth.

As long as God has all the ability not to use evolution at all, everything else remains your own speculation as it is out of humans' capability to work out the past reliably!

 

[The Barbarian]

As long as God has all the ability not to use evolution at all, everything else remains your own speculation

There is the "E" word. Evidence. And even many creationists admit that there is massive evidence for evolution. As long as God has the ability to use evolution, any claim that He didn't remains your own speculation.

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian suggests:
We've kind of gotten off the track. The OP isn't about whether the new doctrine of YE creationism is better than traditional Christian doctrine.

It's about the supposed lack of transitional forms. So perhaps the YE creationists can put their heads together and show us a few pairs of major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, that lack transitional forms.

Let's see if they can find any.

Trilobites are a dominant group of animals from the very beginning or Cambrian.

If evolution were true, these Arthropods which look like aquatic cockroaches or woodlice would have to first evolve all of the following traits of the Arthropoda.
1) multicellularity
2) bilateral symmetry (two halves of body mirror images)
3) cephalisation (nerves concentrated in a head)
4) a skeleton (and an exoskeleton would in the process of evolution leave evidence since these skeletons are hard)
5) a haemocoele or body cavity, possibly with blood and circulation
6) legs
7) a three sectioned body (like insects, hence name TRI-lobite)
8) eyes and other sense organs concentrated in the head
9) a through gut meaning one which starts at one opening (mouth) and ends at another.
10) ability to move about, swim, scavenge etc.[/quote]

O.K. So trilobites are a major group. what group will you compare them to?

And this is but one animal from the Cambrian explosion.
Christians should embrace palaeontology and point to the Trilobite as an example of an "advanced" animal which was there right from the beginning with no missing links leading up to it.

You've been misled on that. This little fella:

Was around long before the Cambrian, in the Ediacaran formation. Notice that it has a lot of affinities to trilobites, but not all of them.

So we have a transitional between trilobites and earlier organisms. Let's look at the other end...

There were many explosions during almost all of the fossil record. Because there was nothing except tiny sponges etc. in the Precambrian,

And now you know better.

The explosion of modern mankind's civilisations, starting at Sumer a few thousand years ago, is another example of an explosion which cannot be explained by evolution.

And shouldn't be. It was a cultural change, the origin of written language, that coincided with the cultural take-off in Mesopotamia. This seems to have happened independently in several places.

Why were there not a continuous build-up of human civilisations before Sumer?

There was. But large-scale construction projects appeared after writing was developed. That way in Egypt, too. But this has nothing to do with your assignment. You were to show us two major groups supposedly evolutionarily connected, without a transitional form. As you see, there are proto-trilobites long before the Cambrian.

Would you like to try again?

 

[The Barbarian]

Anyone else want to try?

 

[Stripe]

Many creationists admit that there is massive evidence for evolution.

:darwinsm:

As long as God has the ability to use evolution, any claim that He didn't remains your own speculation.

Nope.

We have His account of origins.

We know you hate it.


Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app

 

[The Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
The flood story doesn't say the "whole world." Here it is, and as you see, it doesn't say what you want it to say:

Genesis 6:13-21
And God said to Noah: "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the Earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the Earth. Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be 300 cubits, its width 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits. You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark — you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. And you shall take for yourself of all food that is eaten, and you shall gather it to yourself; and it shall be food for you and for them."

As you see, it doesn't say "the whole world." The "earth" was actually "eretz" which can mean, "dirt", "my land" "this particular nation", "hereabouts" and so on. So as you now see, Stipe, it doesn't say "the whole world." Never did.

And if you don't like that, you're going to hate this:

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

So in the time of the Apostles, the "whole world" was used for the Roman Empire. So again, your new belief is undermined by Scripture. You ignore scripture to make it fit your new ideas.

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. So in this case, the Bible used "all the world" to mean the Roman Empire.

The Greek work used there, oikoumene, is also used in passages such as: Luke 21:26; Romans 10:18; Revelation 16:14; Hebrews 1:6 and Matthew 24:14. Are you going to insist that God's judgement will only apply to a "region"?

Like "eretz" which you incorrectly assumed means "the whole world", "oikoumene" can mean (for example) just the Roman Empire, or more precisely, the people living in it.

In 2 Peter, "kosmos" doesn't mean the earth at all. It means the population of people.

The second usage of the word kosmos refers to the inhabitants of this world, or earth. Both of these first two usages appear together in one verse: “He was in the word [earth] and the world [earth] was made by Him, and the world [inhabitants of the earth] knew Him not” (John 1:10). This world of mankind is the world God loves. Jesus said, “For God so loved the world” (John 3:16). However, there is that segment of the world of mankind that is alienated from God (Ephesians 2:12: 4:18) and hostile to Christ and His followers. Our Lord said, “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you” (John 15:18). So then it is this unregenerated world of mankind through whom the demons will accomplish their wicked deeds.
https://bible.org/illustration/world-kosmos

Oikoumene is the word used in Luke 2:1. So we know that the word was used to apply to a region of Earth. If it had other meanings, then you've retreated to claiming without evidence that it means "whole world" in the case where you'd like it to be so. Again, you're trying to put your own wishes into scripture.

 

[Caino]

Dr. Stephen Meyer and Dr. John Ankerberg explore the problems with neo-Darwinism, and the suddenness of the Cambrian Explosion.

Is it sound argument or otherwise?

Throughout the evolution of the life that was created and planted in primitive forms, there have been “mutations” which obviously left NO links, only fossils of the before and after.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Barbarian observes:
Nope. But God says that life came from non-life, so I'm pretty sure He's right.



Sounds like you've gotten misled on that. Let's see what He has to say about it...

Genesis 1:24 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.

Yep. You got some weird misdirection there. But unless you think the Earth is alive (Yes, I know there are "Gaia worshipers") God says that life came from non-life.

let
[let]

VERB
not prevent or forbid; allow:
"my boss let me leave early" · [more]
synonyms: allow to · permit to · give permission to · give leave to · authorize to

 

[iouae]

You've been misled on that. This little fella:

Was around long before the Cambrian, in the Ediacaran formation. Notice that it has a lot of affinities to trilobites, but not all of them.

So we have a transitional between trilobites and earlier organisms.
Would you like to try again?

You post a picture with no name, or source.
By itself this picture is meaningless.

Folks don't know if Ediacaran fossils are plants or animals.

A bit more info please.

 

[Stripe]

Now Blablabarian thinks the flood only affected people. :rotfl:

Barbarian observes:
The flood story doesn't say the "whole world." Here it is, and as you see, it doesn't say what you want it to say:Genesis 6:13-21
[COLOR="#800000"]And God said to Noah: "The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the Earth is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the Earth. Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be 300 cubits, its width 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits. You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark — you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the earth after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. And you shall take for yourself of all food that is eaten, and you shall gather it to yourself; and it shall be food for you and for them."[/COLOR]As you see, it doesn't say "the whole world." The "earth" was actually "eretz" which can mean, "dirt", "my land" "this particular nation", "hereabouts" and so on. So as you now see, Stipe, it doesn't say "the whole world." Never did.And if you don't like that, you're going to hate this:Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.So in the time of the Apostles, the "whole world" was used for the Roman Empire. So again, your new belief is undermined by Scripture. You ignore scripture to make it fit your new ideas.Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. So in this case, the Bible used "all the world" to mean the Roman Empire.Like "eretz" which you incorrectly assumed means "the whole world", "oikoumene" can mean (for example) just the Roman Empire, or more precisely, the people living in it.In 2 Peter, "kosmos" doesn't mean the earth at all. It means the population of people.[COLOR="#800000"]The second usage of the word kosmos refers to the inhabitants of this world, or earth. Both of these first two usages appear together in one verse: “He was in the word [earth] and the world [earth] was made by Him, and the world [inhabitants of the earth] knew Him not” (John 1:10). This world of mankind is the world God loves. Jesus said, “For God so loved the world” (John 3:16). However, there is that segment of the world of mankind that is alienated from God (Ephesians 2:12: 4:18) and hostile to Christ and His followers. Our Lord said, “If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you” (John 15:18). So then it is this unregenerated world of mankind through whom the demons will accomplish their wicked deeds.[/COLOR]
[url]https://bible.org/illustration/world-kosmos[/url]Oikoumene is the word used in Luke 2:1. So we know that the word was used to apply to a region of Earth. If it had other meanings, then you've retreated to claiming without evidence that it means "whole world" in the case where you'd like it to be so. Again, you're trying to put your own wishes into scripture.

:darwinsm:

Keep regurgitating, son.

Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app

 

[Greg Jennings]

I can. :idunno:

Then do it. Otherwise you're just fibbing again

 

[Stripe]

Then do it.

Why?

You've already said that you think it will be lies. :idunno:

Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app

 

[Greg Jennings]

Why?

You've already said that you think it will be lies. :idunno:

Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app

If you have legitimate evidence then I won't be able to deny it. I'm not dishonest

 

[The Barbarian]

Then do it. Otherwise you're just fibbing again

I used to think so. But I've come to the conclusion that he really, honestly believes what he's posting here.

May seem incredible, but I think he does. He's mainly deceiving himself.