[_ Old Earth _] Creation vs. Evolution

[thightower]

When you actually answer the question not just spout scripture at me.

I guess I'm not understanding the question then. You asked me about lightining and grass, I produced scriptural evidence God created both, not happened out of thin air. I guess it depends on where a person gets thier ultimate authority.

 

[Grazer]

I guess I'm not understanding the question then. You asked me about lightining and grass, I produced scriptural evidence God created both, not happened out of thin air. I guess it depends on where a person gets thier ultimate authority.

I think you are misunderstanding. I'm not doubting God created them, I'm talking about descriptions of what they are. Lightening is caused by opposition of charges in the atmosphere, that says nothing about who/what created those charges that causes said lightening. Also, grass. An explanation of what it is says nothing about who/what created it.

My question is this. When lightening happens, is it God causing it because he wants to or because there is sufficient opposite charges to cause a "spark"? The ancient religions believed the former, the latter does not disprove God since he designed the world.

 

[thightower]

I think you are misunderstanding. I'm not doubting God created them, I'm talking about descriptions of what they are. Lightening is caused by opposition of charges in the atmosphere, that says nothing about who/what created those charges that causes said lightening. Also, grass. An explanation of what it is says nothing about who/what created it.

My question is this. When lightening happens, is it God causing it because he wants to or because there is sufficient opposite charges to cause a "spark"? The ancient religions believed the former, the latter does not disprove God since he designed the world.

I believe God uses lightining when he wants to. But as for lightening storms of today, I believe God set the weather patterns in motion, they follow the laws he set forth from the creation.

I don't like to question where the lighining comes from or where grass comes from. Job 38 and 39, God is asking Job things about the earth and nature, questions man has no clue how it happened or where it comes from. The answers to these questions only God knows. I take Job 38:2 very seriously, “Who is this that darkens counsel By words without knowledge?

 

[Grazer]

I believe God uses lightining when he wants to. But as for lightening storms of today, I believe God set the weather patterns in motion, they follow the laws he set forth from the creation.

That's what I believe about lightening

I don't like to question where the lighining comes from or where grass comes from. Job 38 and 39, God is asking Job things about the earth and nature, questions man has no clue how it happened or where it comes from. The answers to these questions only God knows. I take Job 38:2 very seriously, “Who is this that darkens counsel By words without knowledge?

These are basic questions about the world God made, what's wrong with asking them? Job 38:2 doesn't prohibit those questions, God invented science and these belong in sciences realm. God being the source of it all does not and definitely should not ever be used as a reason not to ask these questions or set out to get answers. Trying to answer them without acknowledging God i.e. naturalistic world view is the problem.

 

[jasoncran]

Who are you to call human lower like Modern Homo sapeins is so great???
You wouldn't like it when homophobics or racial slurs are mad against humans would you?
Just because Noah was a Cro-magmon didn't excuse Ham for calling him stupid, did it?



Gen. 9:22 And Ham, (the negroid stock of Modern Homosapiens), the father of Canaan, saw the (intellectual), nakedness (of understanding the times and processes and technical abilities) of his father, (Cro-Magnon), and told his two (Modern Homo sapiens) brethren without (that the Stone Age of Noah was past, and the day of their own Times had begun).

Gen. 9:23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment (of sorts, to veil the past of this Noahian species), and laid it upon both their shoulders (to honor their association with this sub-species), and went backward (in time), and covered the nakedness (of his lack of understanding those pre-historic times and stone-age processes and tecnologies) of their father; and their faces were backward, (to the past) and they saw not (a continuum with) their father's (intellectual) nakedness.

quite racist! the negroid isnt what i would say to any man that is black that he is from ham. that isnt quite true. while its possible but i would have to dig to find that

from the levitical passages on food. apes aint listed

11 And the Lord spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them,
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.
3 Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat.
4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
5 And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat.
10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
11 They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
12 Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.
13 And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,
14 And the vulture, and the kite after his kind;
15 Every raven after his kind;
16 And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind,
17 And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,
18 And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle,
19 And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.
20 All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you.
21 Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;
22 Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind.
23 But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you.
24 And for these ye shall be unclean: whosoever toucheth the carcase of them shall be unclean until the even.
25 And whosoever beareth ought of the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even.
26 The carcases of every beast which divideth the hoof, and is not clovenfooted, nor cheweth the cud, are unclean unto you: every one that toucheth them shall be unclean.
27 And whatsoever goeth upon his paws, among all manner of beasts that go on all four, those are unclean unto you: whoso toucheth their carcase shall be unclean until the even.
28 And he that beareth the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: they are unclean unto you.
29 These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind,
30 And the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole.
31 These are unclean to you among all that creep: whosoever doth touch them, when they be dead, shall be unclean until the even.
32 And upon whatsoever any of them, when they are dead, doth fall, it shall be unclean; whether it be any vessel of wood, or raiment, or skin, or sack, whatsoever vessel it be, wherein any work is done, it must be put into water, and it shall be unclean until the even; so it shall be cleansed.
33 And every earthen vessel, whereinto any of them falleth, whatsoever is in it shall be unclean; and ye shall break it.
34 Of all meat which may be eaten, that on which such water cometh shall be unclean: and all drink that may be drunk in every such vessel shall be unclean.
35 And every thing whereupon any part of their carcase falleth shall be unclean; whether it be oven, or ranges for pots, they shall be broken down: for they are unclean and shall be unclean unto you.
36 Nevertheless a fountain or pit, wherein there is plenty of water, shall be clean: but that which toucheth their carcase shall be unclean.
37 And if any part of their carcase fall upon any sowing seed which is to be sown, it shall be clean.
38 But if any water be put upon the seed, and any part of their carcase fall thereon, it shall be unclean unto you.
39 And if any beast, of which ye may eat, die; he that toucheth the carcase thereof shall be unclean until the even.
40 And he that eateth of the carcase of it shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: he also that beareth the carcase of it shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even.
41 And every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth shall be an abomination; it shall not be eaten.
42 Whatsoever goeth upon the belly, and whatsoever goeth upon all four, or whatsoever hath more feet among all creeping things that creep upon the earth, them ye shall not eat; for they are an abomination.
43 Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby.
44 For I am the Lord your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
45 For I am the Lord that bringeth you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God: ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.
46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth:
47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.

that is first calling modern man(blacks) apes . careful.

http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/Negroid

sorry, i would advise agianst that.

jews have names for their general location of history ie. if it ands man and stein and those we all know its ashkenazi(named after one of the names in that list of 70 nations).

 

[jasoncran]

really, um the jews teach that was an insult by hem.how about he was drunk? he was drunk per this verse.
genesis 9

And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.

rather then coverup his dad he laughed and mocked him. my dad does some things of this nature. that DOESNT give me an excuse to publically mock him.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Many Christians accept The Theory of Evolution ( the actual theory, not the strawman argument many non informed people use) because the theory in lay man's terms means that living organism and some non living organisms (viruses), adapt to their environment through genetic mutation and natural selection over generations.


The theory of evolution is a key part to modern medicine and biology and helped unite several theories that didn't make sense in Biology and medicine until The theory of evolution and the theory of genetics both came on the scene.

Many Christians accept modern Medicine and accept modern genetics, so those educated in the biological definition of the Theory of Evolution are willing to accept the parts that make sense and can be fitted in with their religion.

Accepting the theory of Evolution does not mean the person accept every single straw Man argument many opponents of the theory of Evolution claim they do.

Does this clear up the misunderstanding?

 

[cupid dave]

quite racist! the negroid isnt what i would say to any man that is black that he is from ham. that isnt quite true. while its possible but i would have to dig to find that

from the levitical passages on food. apes aint listed


that is first calling modern man(blacks) apes . careful.

http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/Negroid

sorry, i would advise agianst that.

jews have names for their general location of history ie. if it ands man and stein and those we all know its ashkenazi(named after one of the names in that list of 70 nations).

Gen 5:32 And Noah, (an archaic type of Homo sapiens forebearer), was five hundred "years" old, (and the Flood will come when Noah is 600 "years" old: Gen 7:6) : and Noah begat Shem, (the Mongoloids), Ham, (the Negroids), and Japheth, (the Caucasians).

 

[Adam]

The claim from a 1912 book of three races has been widely debunked for 40 years now.

 

[Asyncritus]

Many Christians accept The Theory of Evolution ( the actual theory, not the strawman argument many non informed people use) because the theory in lay man's terms means that living organism and some non living organisms (viruses), adapt to their environment through genetic mutation and natural selection over generations.

Oh yeah!

The theory of evolution is a key part to modern medicine and biology and helped unite several theories that didn't make sense in Biology and medicine until The theory of evolution and the theory of genetics both came on the scene.

Which particular part of medicine did you have in mind?

Many Christians accept modern Medicine and accept modern genetics, so those educated in the biological definition of the Theory of Evolution are willing to accept the parts that make sense and can be fitted in with their religion.

The truth is that very little of it makes any sense when the facts are looked at squarely in the face.

Accepting the theory of Evolution does not mean the person accept every single straw Man argument many opponents of the theory of Evolution claim they do.

But they do accept the straw man arguments the evolutionists put forward, irrespective of what the facts might say!

Here's a little point you might like to ignore:

In order for birds to fly, they need feathers. These feathers need to be oiled, and the oil comes from a preening gland at the bird's tail end.

Reptiles have no such thing! Why should they? They've no feathers to oil. So where did the preen gland come from?

Here's an informative article on the subject. Nowhere is the evolution of the preen gland mentioned. Wonder why!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uropygial_gland

Also, birds have a tail, with feathers which can be spread and angled when the bird comes in to land. It would crash otherwise.

Where did a reptile get that I wonder?

Here's a beautiful video illustrating what I mean:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA6XSrM0V_0&feature=player_embedded

Does this clear up the misunderstanding?

Erm, no...

As we're on the subject of flight, did you know that insects fly with membranous wings, and most of them have 4 wings instead of 2?

And just as another little problem, dragonfly larvae (nymphs) live UNDERWATER, but the adults are airborne. Now how did that happen , one wonders, yessss, one wonders...!

Bats fly with skin, stretched between their FINGERS - unlike birds whose wings are made from their whole arm. BTW, humming bird wings are formed from their hands! Not the whole arm!!! Yesssss, one wonders....

Pterosaurs used to fly with skin stretched between the little finger (!!!!) and the ankle according to some.

Now which evolved from which, one wonderrrrs, yessssss, one wonders...!

 

[Milk-Drops]

Oh yeah!

Which particular part of medicine did you have in mind?

Heridity, Gene Therapy, genetic marking, virology, and immunology.

The truth is that very little of it makes any sense when the facts are looked at squarely in the face.

The facts are that all organisms produce, and the organisms that don't adapt to their environment go extinct, causing genetic lines to diversify based on the specific pressures of the area.

But they do accept the straw man arguments the evolutionists put forward, irrespective of what the facts might say!/quote] Since neither of us have fully defined, and as far as I know, you have never fully defined what you consider to be the Theory of Evolution, I think more explanation is needed to evaluate your statement.

Here's a little point you might like to ignore:

I haven't ignored it, since you are just now presenting it and presenting your questions and argument from from ignorance as if its evidence for evolution, when its merely just a random question meant to derail this thread, so I won't be tackling it in this thread, so if you want to discuss it, you should start another thread.

 

[Asyncritus]

Heridity, Gene Therapy, genetic marking, virology, and immunology.

These have nothing to do with evolution, and are independent branches of the biological sciences.

The facts are that all organisms produce, and the organisms that don't adapt to their environment go extinct, causing genetic lines to diversify based on the specific pressures of the area.

No, you've got that wrong too.
If an organism couldn't survive, as you say, it would go extinct.

So if it survived, it ALREADY HAD the necessaries. So the environmental pressures didn't produce the new variants - it wiped out the weak, and preserved the strong. But BOTH existed at the same time.

But they do accept the straw man arguments the evolutionists put forward, irrespective of what the facts might say!

Since neither of us have fully defined, and as far as I know, you have never fully defined what you consider to be the Theory of Evolution, I think more explanation is needed to evaluate your statement.

Go read any biology textbook. They're full of the tripe people are expected to swallow, as obviously, you have.

I haven't ignored it, since you are just now presenting it and presenting your questions and argument from from ignorance as if its evidence for evolution, when its merely just a random question meant to derail this thread, so I won't be tackling it in this thread, so if you want to discuss it, you should start another thread.

Those are very serious questions which any evolutionist should be able to answer - after all, birds, bats and insects are everywhere.

You have taken on the mantle of supporter of evolution, so a few questions shouldn't present you with much difficulty. I thought.

 

[Grazer]

I did a little thread about evolution and the various definitions if anyone finds it useful;

http://www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=44862

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Milk-Drops]

These have nothing to do with evolution, and are independent branches of the biological sciences.

Then I guess you don't understand what these branches of biology are, considering all of these deal with how organisms adapt, and all these areas of Medicine where opened up thanks to the theory of evolution.

No, you've got that wrong too.
If an organism couldn't survive, as you say, it would go extinct.

I didn't get it wrong, considering extinction is actually also explained by the theory of evolution.

So if it survived, it ALREADY HAD the necessaries. So the environmental pressures didn't produce the new variants - it wiped out the weak, and preserved the strong. But BOTH existed at the same time.

We've had this conversation before, so I'll just post the basics for the sake of the OP and if the OP wants to see my responses to you, I'll just link him/her to the posts. Individual organisms don't "evolve" populations adapt and the specific traits that the pressures select differentiate separate populations. Which is why we see differences between Dogs, Bears, wolverines, Weasels, Racoons, and Wolves, when all are Caniforms.

Go read any biology textbook.

I have 5 on my shelf right now.

They're full of the tripe people are expected to swallow, as obviously, you have.

I've also read the tripe you wish for me to swallow by the numerous threads you have created and abandoned when our resident biologists come in and tare them apart. Once again, I'm not derailing this thread for that nonsense.

Those are very serious questions which any evolutionist should be able to answer - after all, birds, bats and insects are everywhere.

Nah, they are random questions you pulled from somewhere and as I've learned from your other threads, you'll ignore any evidence given and refuse to explain what you would accept. Any evolutionist that has spoken with you before should be able to understand that you are just a troll. ;)

You have taken on the mantle of supporter of evolution,so a few questions shouldn't present you with much difficulty. I thought.

Well, considering that you have refused to define your terms and conditions in the past and currently, I see you as no real threat since you are not any form of authority on the matter and outside this forum you have no real sway. So I hope that suffices to why I'm not taking any great pains to play your games that I was foolish to fall for in the past. ;)

 

[Grazer]

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" - Theodosius Dobzhansky

Apparently he was an Russian Orthodox Christian

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[Asyncritus]

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" - Theodosius Dobzhansky

Apparently he was an Russian Orthodox Christian

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

Must have had a few drinks before writing that nonsense.

 

[Asyncritus]

Then I guess you don't understand what these branches of biology are, considering all of these deal with how organisms adapt, and all these areas of Medicine where opened up thanks to the theory of evolution.

I didn't get it wrong, considering extinction is actually also explained by the theory of evolution.

What nonsense.

We've had this conversation before, so I'll just post the basics for the sake of the OP and if the OP wants to see my responses to you, I'll just link him/her to the posts. Individual organisms don't "evolve" populations adapt and the specific traits that the pressures select differentiate separate populations. Which is why we see differences between Dogs, Bears, wolverines, Weasels, Racoons, and Wolves, when all are Caniforms.

Did you know that the earliest fossils of anything you care to name are pretty exactly as they are today? Go look.

I have 5 on my shelf right now. I've also read the tripe you wish for me to swallow by the numerous threads you have created and abandoned when our resident biologists come in and tare them apart. Once again, I'm not derailing this thread for that nonsense.

You might try reading one of them - with a critical eye instead of your oesophagus.

If you can swallow the guff your resident evolutionists produce, then again I say, the brain is the organ of thought, not the oesophagus.

Nah, they are random questions you pulled from somewhere and as I've learned from your other threads, you'll ignore any evidence given and refuse to explain what you would accept. Any evolutionist that has spoken with you before should be able to understand that you are just a troll. ;)

Evidence? What evidence? You have none, and neither do your 'resident evolutionists'.

Well, considering that you have refused to define your terms and conditions in the past and currently, I see you as no real threat since you are not any form of authority on the matter and outside this forum you have no real sway. So I hope that suffices to why I'm not taking any great pains to play your games that I was foolish to fall for in the past. ;)

Neither are you any form of authority, so I'm afraid that your pontifications won't wash round here. Except with your 'resident evolutionists' of course - and their oesophagi are just as active as yours.

I'm not playing games, meatball. Evolution is the most damaging anti-God theory on the planet just now. If you're in the anti-God camp by choice, then too bad for you. If you don't know better, then I can wear that.

But don't kid yourself that you can have both, as Barbarian deceives himself into thinking. You're either with God or not - and believing this theory has had such disastrous results in society, it's nearly unbelievable.

A tree is known by its fruits, and looking at the history of social Darwinism, and the number of atheists the theory has produced, makes it clear that the tree is poisonous, and rotten to the core.

So you'd better review your position carefully.

 

[Grazer]

Oh geez not this "you must choose evolution or God" nonsense again. Evolution is a mechanism, God is an agent, the 2 are not and have never been in conflict as they are 2 different categories of explanation. They are no more in conflict than the laws of physics/aerodynamics is in conflict with Adrian Newey as an explanation for the Red Bull Racing F1 car.

Since evolution is a mechanism, a description, it can't do any damage on its own. It can and has been used by flawed human beings to justify massive suffering but so has religion.

My faith in Christ is because of what he did on the cross. A belief in a young earth or evolution has no effect on that and I suspect its the same for the number of Christian scientists or indeed Christians generally.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

 

[stovebolts]

The theory of evolution is a key part to modern medicine and biology and helped unite several theories that didn't make sense in Biology and medicine until The theory of evolution and the theory of genetics both came on the scene.

Many Christians accept modern Medicine and accept modern genetics, so those educated in the biological definition of the Theory of Evolution are willing to accept the parts that make sense and can be fitted in with their religion.

Does this clear up the misunderstanding?

I would like to introduce you to observational science and historical science.

Modern medicine is based on observational science, not historical science. So yes, a creationist can perform, engage, research and assist in observational science (modern medicine), and do it very well.

The theory of evolution belongs in the historical science realm, as does Creation as observational science does not depend on historical science.

Just thought I'd point out that strawman.

 

[cupid dave]

Oh geez not this "you must choose evolution or God" nonsense again. Evolution is a mechanism, God is an agent, the 2 are not and have never been in conflict as they are 2 different categories of explanation.2

Right, in that the Bible never says how.
It merely declares the finished acts as they "evolve," themselves, unfolding a story that for lack of specifics, generally agrees with what we laern in school.