[__ Science __ ] Noahs Flood explained and Evolution refuted.

[Barbarian]

So which one did you use when you claimed that K2K evo worming its way into schools was a "supersition"?

Since biology has always been taught in public schools, the "worming" is merely a superstition. It's been part of public school biology curricula pretty much since Morgan showed how Darwinian evolution worked at a genetic level.

Perhaps defining terms would be appropriate in this discussion.

Microevolution​

Definition
noun, plural: microevolutions
Evolution involving small-scale changes, i.e. within the species, occurring over a short period of time

Macroevolution​

Definition
noun, plural: macroevolutions
Evolution happening on a large scale, e.g. at or above the level of a species, over geologic time resulting in the divergence of taxonomic groups.

Macroevolution

Definition noun, plural: macroevolutions Evolution happening on a large scale, e.g. at or above the level of a species, over geologic time resulting in the divergence of taxonomic groups. Supplement Macroevolution involves variation of allele

www.biologyonline.com

 

[Barbarian]

Yes. "They invented because they invented". Believing in OEK2KE pulled the wool over your eyes again.

Nope. Perhaps you don't know what "circular reasoning" is. What do you think it is?

And that isn't what I showed you. Maybe you'd do better if you argued with what I say, instead of what you wish I had said.

There were some European scientists who had some glimmer of what was going on,

explain?

Most scientists by Darwin's time, thought that some kind of change in living things must have occurred. Lamarck, for instances, supposed some kind of "striving" force inside organisms. Darwin's great discovery was not evolution. He discovered how it worked.

(claims that prayer is banned in public schools)

You really got that one wrong. My daughter was a member of FCA, and they prayed before and during school together. You see, our religious freedoms assure us the right to practice religion, and the right to not have government impose religion on us. C'mon.

My apologies for not adding the words "most of".
Yes, they turned MOST OF the public schools. But they did it gradually, not instantly.

No, that's wrong, too. The courts have repeatedly upheld the rights of students to pray and practice their religion, so long as they don't impose on other students.

But you seem to be right when you imply that prayer is still in schools.

Of course. Too often, in earlier times, when the government forced students to pray, they also prevented students from praying in ways the government didn't like. That's why the Supreme Court put an end to both of those abuses.

Secular is not neutral.

The Constitution requires that government remain neutral, neither supporting nor suppressing religion. This is as it should be; God neither needs nor wants a government handout.

In the futile struggle to be "neutral", public schools are caving to what the Athiests are peddling.

I know of no public school that teaches that there is no god. C'mon.

 

[kbmonday]

I

The evolution of new taxa pretty much settles that. That's how God makes the variety of living things on Earth. It's no coincidence that genetics has confirmed this finding.


You've been badly misled on that. In the case of ring species, for example, microevolution can retroactively become macroevolution.

I think you should probably learn what those words mean in science.

Are you speaking of the recent study of new plankton taxon? They are still plankton, just with mutations. There has never been an observation of micro evolution becoming macro evolution. If I am in error, please enlighten me and cite a source.

 

[Barbarian]

Yep. It says that grasshoppers (a suborder!) are one kind. It says that birds and bats, (different classes!) are a kind.

Oh? Where?

Leviticus 11:22 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.

Beetles are an entire order, BTW. So the Bible says that "kind" is at the level of order, in that verse.

Leviticaus 11:19 sets "kind" at phyla. It says bats are birds. (they are both chordates)

BTW, humans and other apes are in the same family (Hominidae) and are, by your estimate, the same "kind."

Do you not see that the "kind" in the Bible is a functional classification, which does not consider relationships between living things.?

No fish were on the Ark.

Which is a huge problem for freshwater fish which die in oceans or even brackish water. Noah had to make space for them, also.

(supposed atheistic source of evolution)
Since Darwin attributed the origin of life to God, you couldn't be more wrong in making that assumption.

So how do you know Darwin was not lukewarm?

I merely noted that Darwin supposed God created the first living things. If you consider that "lukewarm", I'd have to point out that Darwin had it right.

That's not because of Darwin, that's because you finally admitted that most geologists accepted what the Bible said, until they let in compromise.

I pointed out that they assumed a YE, until the evidence showed them it could not be so. They refused to compromise with the truth and so accepted that they were wrong in their earlier assumptions.

Say you have a mechanical alarm clock in your room, like the circular one with hands that you hit on the top.
And you have a digital watch. So you prepare for work, leave your house, and go to work.
But then, you clock out for the day, return home, enter your room, and your alarm clock says 10 am! But the digital watch says "8 pm". And the sun going down confirms that your watch is correct.
So does that mean that 14 hours passed, and that your reliable watch is wrong? NO!!

Fortunately, isochrons prevent that kind of error in dating rocks. Would you like to learn how that works?

Men's interpretations of scripture are fallible and have often been wrong. God made physics, and it works reliably. Why not go with God's way?

 

[Barbarian]

You've been badly misled on that. In the case of ring species, for example, microevolution can retroactively become macroevolution.

I think you should probably learn what those words mean in science.

Are you speaking of the recent study of new plankton taxon?

No. There is no "plankton taxon." Plankton include organisms of various phyla, kingdoms, and domains.

Ring species are those in which individuals of adjacent populations can interbreed with each other, but individuals from more distantly-separated populations cannot interbreed. They remain a single species because genes flow freely through the species. But if the middle population(s) become extinct, they can no longer interbreed, and there are now two separate species. Microevolutionary would then become macroevolution.

 

[kbmonday]

Barbarian
Let me ask you an honest question. Do you think you are edifying the body of Christ with this discussion? Or could you perhaps be casting a stumbling block before those young in the faith that are trying to build their foundation? Sometimes insisting on being right is an issue with ego. Do you stand on the authority of God, or upon man's authority?

 

[Barbarian]

Let me ask you an honest question. Do you think you are edifying the body of Christ with this discussion?

You ask some good questions. Truth always edifies God and those who follow Him.

Or could you perhaps be casting a stumbling block before those young in the faith that are trying to build their foundation?

That's the issue. YE creationism is a great atheist-maker. St. Augustine warned his fellow Christians about this, over a thousand years ago.

"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. Now it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics, and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn... If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe our books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren, ... to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call on Holy Scripture, .. although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. "
St. Augustine, Confessions

It's as true now, as it was then. Here's the testimony from a former YE creationist, who nearly lost his faith over the false stories he learned from the Institute for Creation Research:
But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

“From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true?”

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said ‘No!’ A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, “Wait a minute. There has to be one!” But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now, but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.

And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.

Why I Left Young-Earth Creationism

In memory of Glenn Morton (1950-2020), Peaceful Science is republishing his personal account and testimony of leaving Young-Earth Creationism.

peacefulscience.org

I met Glenn on a Christian board, and heard his story how his faith weathered that storm. Not everyone is that fortunate. This is the real damage YE does to faith. You won't go to hell for believing in it; it's not a salvation issue. But many people have become atheists in that way.

Sometimes insisting on being right is an issue with ego.

I find it's usually indoctrination to the point that it's extremely difficult for some to even look at the issue.

Do you stand on the authority of God, or upon man's authority?

"Know the truth and the truth will set you free." A Christian should never fear the truth.

 

[kbmonday]

Truth always edifies God.

That's the issue. YE creationism is a great atheist-maker. St. Augustine warned his fellow Christians about this, over a thousand years ago.

"Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. Now it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics, and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn... If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe our books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren, ... to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call on Holy Scripture, .. although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. "
St. Augustine, Confessions

It's as true now, as it was then. Here's the testimony from a former YE creationist, who nearly lost his faith over the false stories he learned from the Institute for Creation Research:
But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

“From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true?”

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said ‘No!’ A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, “Wait a minute. There has to be one!” But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now, but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.

And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.

Why I Left Young-Earth Creationism

In memory of Glenn Morton (1950-2020), Peaceful Science is republishing his personal account and testimony of leaving Young-Earth Creationism.

peacefulscience.org

This is the real damage YE does to faith. You won't go to hell for believing in it; it's not a salvation issue. But many people have become atheists in that way.

I find it's usually indoctrination to the point that it's extremely difficult for some to even look at the issue.


"Know the truth and the truth will set you free." He's my authority.

Thank you for your response, and for your understanding that my questions were not an attack, but curiosity. Personally, I do not believe in a loose interpretation of scripture. As it is not a salvation issue though, I will not engage in this discussion as I see it as unfruitful. But by all means, iron sharpens iron, so have at it.

 

[Barbarian]

Thank you for your response, and for your understanding that my questions were not an attack, but curiosity.

Sure. BTW, I value bluntness, so please speak your mind.

Personally, I do not believe in a loose interpretation of scripture.

I don't think YE is "loose." I think it's mistaken. I guess in the sense of reading more into Genesis than is actually written, one might call it "loose." But maybe not.

Similarly, one might say that those who see the "days" of creation as not literal 24 hour days, might be said to have a "loose" ( i.e. figurative ) interpretation.

St. Augustine noted that it was difficult to say exactly what some of the verses are about, and that we should be willing to change our minds if facts should so indicate. What the days are, is not certain, but God is very clear and plain about salvation.

Even then, Christians argue about that.

My thought is that theology saves no one, but a heart turned to Jesus and to our neighbors will save us.

 

[KV-44-v1]

By definition, they were SDA. It's an SDA doctrine.

Nope. Refuted that already.
YEC is a Biblical doctrine. Not an "ellen white" one.

K2K Evolution was made by pagans. then darwin picked up their bad legacy.

George became SDA, so SDA invented YEC!!"
So I can use your argument to claim that Athiests made up Christianity, because athiests became Christians throughout history.
I can claim that Lee Strobels invented Christianity because he became Christian.

If you think Ellen G. White was not an SDA. But that is just wrong.

Could it be.... that YEC is NOT made by sda's?

I didn't say ellen white there.

"Ellen was an SDA, and she invented YE creationism, which was adopted by the SDAs, so YE is an SDA doctrine."

This is not a rebuttal but a dodge.

Doesn't seem to fit your imagination very well, does it?

Yes, the fact that YEC fell into the SDA trap in the past does not fit the imaginary "YEC is made by sda's" teaching.

Her revisions include:

Creation, which occurred in a literal week.

Remember Biologos. Most Christians before old earthism was invented believe it was a real week. The Bible itself says "first day" to "sixth day". Could it be anymore straightforward?

You already admit that pagans preached K2K evo. And you admit athiests would not teach YEC.

She also taught that Noah's flood had sculpted the surface of the earth, burying the plants and animals found in the fossil record,

it did. That's a lot better explanation than the extrapolations and guesses made by evolution athiests in Big Science.
It's backed up by much evidence unlike guesses founded on K2KE and deep time instead of the Bible.

The pagans taught K2K evolution. The humanistic West teaches deep time in the schools as history instead of Genesis.

You never addressed why gasoline is still useful. Thanks for letting the YEC side dominate the logic war.

As you know, even creationist geologists eventually admitted that the evidence would not fit a literal creation week.

It would. The flood.

 

[KV-44-v1]

The evolution of new taxa pretty much settles that.

You say "New taxa" as if that somehow involves above genus.

That's how God makes the variety of living things on Earth.

How did you verify this.
Did you ask God yourself when you saw a new species form and He said "yes"? If not, what?
Scripture?

KB monday is talking about K2K evo. Not CAFPT or speciation.

It's no coincidence that genetics has confirmed this finding.

Yes, genetics confirms many YEC Christian aka Genesis-trusting Christian findings. Like soft tissue in dinosaurs. Genes would degrade over deep time. Good thing deep time is wrong.

You've been badly misled on that.

I agree that you have, Barb.
The Truth will set you free, not turn you into an animal.

In the case of ring species, for example, microevolution can retroactively become macroevolution.

But you assert that macroevolution is speciation.
K2KE is not speciation. One example of a K2KE belief is the the "dino to bird" belief.

I think you should probably learn what those words mean in science.

BTW, I value bluntness, so please speak your mind.

We agree on something! :woot

I don't think YE is "loose." I think it's mistaken. I guess in the sense of reading more into Genesis than is actually written, one might call it "loose." But maybe not.

OE*
Fixed it.

"loose" ( i.e. figurative ) interpretation.

Fast and loose!

What the days are, is not certain,

I can say your posts are uncertain and that claim would have equal weight.

My thought is that theology saves no one, but a heart turned to Jesus and to our neighbors will save us.

God will save us.

 

[kbmonday]

You say "New taxa" as if that somehow involves above genus.

How did you verify this.
Did you ask God yourself when you saw a new species form and He said "yes"? If not, what?
Scripture?

KB monday is talking about K2K evo. Not CAFPT or speciation.

Yes, genetics confirms many YEC Christian aka Genesis-trusting Christian findings. Like soft tissue in dinosaurs. Genes would degrade over deep time. Good thing deep time is wrong.

I agree that you have, Barb.
The Truth will set you free, not turn you into an animal.

But you assert that macroevolution is speciation.
K2KE is not speciation. One example of a K2KE belief is the the "dino to bird" belief.



We agree on something! :woot


OE*
Fixed it.


Fast and loose!


I can say your posts are uncertain and that claim would have equal weight.


God will save us.

Glad you mentioned the soft tissues found in dinosaur bones brother. Now, after years of saying this was impossible, science is grasping at straws to explain this. At some point we must decide who the authority is, mankind who constantly gets it wrong and must revise history to match assumption - or the Word of God that has not changed and yet is continually proven true by evidence. If we have eyes to see, that is.

Fibres and cellular structures preserved in 75-million–year-old dinosaur specimens - Nature Communications

Soft tissue from vertebrate fossils has previously been documented, but only in exceptionally preserved specimens. Here, Bertazzo et al. describe structures consistent with collagen fibres and red blood cells from eight Cretaceous dinosaur bones, none of which are exceptionally preserved.

www.nature.com

 

[KV-44-v1]

Since biology has always been taught in public schools, the "worming" is merely a superstition.

K2KE belongs in biology like how Avengers vs x men belongs in military training. This is not an attack, but a real thought.

Evolution involving small-scale changes, i.e. within the species, occurring over a short period of time

So you now say it is small scale changes, CAFPT or small scale changes?

Evolution happening on a large scale, e.g. at or above the level of a species, over geologic time resulting in the divergence of taxonomic groups.

Thought you said it was speciation. So the veil is lifted, macro evo is not speciation. It "could be More!"

Nope. Perhaps you don't know what "circular reasoning" is. What do you think it is?

"SDA invented YEC because they invented the belief." - You, 2024

when did "sda invented because sda invented" because non-circular reasoning? Now you veer away from logic. Which is the option K2KE and deep time advocates inevitably choose if they don't accept evidence of YEC first.

Maybe you'd do better if you argued with what I say,

II quoted correctly. which quote did I misquote you?

wish I had said.

What makes you think this, what did i "wish you had said"?

Most scientists by Darwin's time, thought that some kind of change in living things must have occurred.

Yes, but not K2KE.

Darwin's great discovery was not evolution. He discovered how it worked.

Which one?

The Constitution requires that government remain neutral, neither supporting nor suppressing religion. This is as it should be; God neither needs nor wants a government handout.

Well there's no neutral. Either for or against God.
"Whoever is not with Me scatters..."

I know of no public school that teaches that there is no god. C'mon.

Athiests peddle more than just noGodism.

They teach the three athiest-makers and athiest-keepers as historical fact and say it is "science". Would you like to know their names?

Which is a huge problem for freshwater fish which die in oceans or even brackish water. Noah had to make space for them, also.

The fish could adapt since they had it in their genes already. DNA was richer in Noah's time.

(supposed atheistic source of evolution)
Since Darwin attributed the origin of life to God, you couldn't be more wrong in making that assumption.

Yes, i was wrong, i now know it was pagans who created the belief of K2K evo.
not athiests, not God.
Athiests were just a vehicle for spreading K2KE idea to Christians and elsewhere.
Speciation and CAFPT are just RESULTS of God's instant creation in an actual week. And they are not K2KE.

If you consider that "lukewarm", I'd have to point out that Darwin had it right.

Dodging again. How did you know Darwin was not lukewarm? To whom did he preach the Gospel?

I pointed out that they assumed a YE, until the evidence showed them it could not be so. They refused to compromise with the truth and so accepted that they were wrong in their earlier assumptions.

Gasoline's usefulness and soft dino tissue is pretty good evidence showing OE believers that deep time is illogical.

God made physics, and it works reliably. Why not go with God's way?

That does not mean you can use it to figure out specific events in the past. Could you prove that WW2 happened with only science? No.

And how do you know human sin did not taint physics?

K2KE is sci fi.

YE creationism is a great atheist-maker.

Already debunked that. Explain why no athiest takes YEC as fact. Right, it destroys their belief. Not much of an "Athiest maker" ;)

Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren, ... to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call on Holy Scripture, .. although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion. "

This could be about any error. Even K2KE.

But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

“From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true?”

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said ‘No!’ A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, “Wait a minute. There has to be one!” But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now, but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.

And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.

addressed this.

This is the real damage YE does to faith.

OE*
Fixed again.

You won't go to hell for believing in it; it's not a salvation issue. But many people have become atheists in that way.

Perhaps its the "making Creation vs K2KE into a salvation issue" that's the athiest maker. Not the truth called YEC.

"Know the truth and the truth will set you free." A Christian should never fear the truth.

Another thing we agree on.

 

[KV-44-v1]

Glad you mentioned the soft tissues found in dinosaur bones brother. Now, after years of saying this was impossible, science is grasping at straws to explain this. At some point we must decide who the authority is, mankind who constantly gets it wrong and must revise history to match assumption - or the Word of God that has not changed and yet is continually proven true by evidence. If we have eyes to see, that is.

Fibres and cellular structures preserved in 75-million–year-old dinosaur specimens - Nature Communications

Soft tissue from vertebrate fossils has previously been documented, but only in exceptionally preserved specimens. Here, Bertazzo et al. describe structures consistent with collagen fibres and red blood cells from eight Cretaceous dinosaur bones, none of which are exceptionally preserved.

www.nature.com

Yes. K2KE and old earth beliefs change again and again. Not YEC. Earth still young and creation Week was still a short time and the flood was still global.

YEC predictions come true because they are based on the BIBLE.
Not on sda, not ellen white, not darwinism, not athiesm, not paganism.

 

[kbmonday]

Yes. K2KE and old earth beliefs change again and again. Not YEC. Earth still young and creation Week was still a short time and the flood was still global.

YEC predictions come true because they are based on the BIBLE.
Not on sda, not ellen white, not darwinism, not athiesm, not paganism.

Amen brother!

 

[KV-44-v1]

"

Part 3 of 3Should we make judgments about other believers, especially as it relates to their erroneous teachings on Genesis?Answers in Genesis points out that there are many Christians/Christian leaders who add evolution and/or millions of years to Scripture. We expose this compromise not to make harsh judgments about the person or his spiritual walk but to show the inconsistency of a Christian leader toward Genesis—and the negative implications that it can have on the rest of Scripture and on the people they teach.Now, the ministry of AiG is dedicated to upholding the authority of the Bible and giving answers to point out that such compromise positions are really undermining God’s Word and its authority. When I do that, I’m often told that I’m unloving and that we should not be making judgments about others by pointing out errors in their teaching regarding Genesis.Some people take offense and say that as believers, we should focus on loving others and not be divisive. We are, however, divisive if we do not correct error. Are we working toward the “unity of the faith” (Ephesians 4:13), or are we compromising God’s Word by allowing for the world’s “wisdom”? Remember, as believers we are all part of “one faith” (Ephesians 4:5). We must establish our foundation in the truth of God’s Word and not our own philosophies, making God the authority over our life. Having the right foundation will help us to know the difference between truth and lies as well as right and wrong. Paul explained the need for truth and the divisive nature of lies in the following passage:“That we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love” (Ephesians 4:14–16).We need unity on the truth of God’s infallible Word, not unity on man’s fallible word! As I’ve said many times, the truth is divisive in a world where “men loved darkness rather than light.” There can never be total unity in this world. And there will never be unity in the church because of man’s sinful hearts. We must always judge people’s beliefs against Scripture and this by necessity will create division, but division for the right reasons.I say it’s unloving to tell people not to take God at His Word in Genesis and accept man’s fallible ideas of evolution/millions. It’s unloving because this can negatively impact people’s view of Scripture and lead people away from the truth

"

"

s it in the way we live, laugh and love? Or maybe it is our dislike of cheesy clichés? Deep within each of us, there must be something that makes us distinctly human. The trouble is, after centuries of searching, we still haven’t found it. Perhaps that’s because we have been looking in the wrong place.

Yes, evolutionists struggle to define what makes us human—and when exactly we “became” human because, yes, they’re looking in the wrong place. Instead of looking to the perfect history given to us in his Word by the God who was there, who knows everything, and who has never made a mistake, they continue to rely on the interpretations of people who weren’t there, who don’t know everything, and who often make mistakes. So of course evolutionists struggle—they have the wrong starting point! They aren’t looking at the one unique very special book they need to be looking at—the Bible.

This article reminded me that there’s another group that struggles to say when exactly we became human—progressive creationists and theistic evolutionists (those who compromise God’s Word in Genesis with evolution/millions of years). After all, they believe much (or in the case of theistic evolutionists nearly all) of the evolutionary story, including that there were prehuman “hominids” before God gave his image to two humans. But which supposed group of human ancestors suddenly became “human enough” to bear God’s image? For some progressive creationists, Neanderthals weren’t fully human, and yet they wore jewelry and makeup, practiced dental hygiene and medical care, understood rudimentary chemistry, made weapons and instruments, buried their dead with rituals, and more—they certainly bear all the hallmarks of humanity. It’s a confusing mess when you attempt to add man’s ever-changing ideas into God’s Word!

In a biblical worldview founded on Genesis 1–11, we understand there were no “prehuman hominids.” Humans and apes are completely separate kinds in no way related to one another; apes were created by God’s spoken command, but man was uniquely crafted by God from the dust and given the breath of life.

And the “something” evolutionists are seeking that “makes us distinctly human” is also revealed in God’s Word: humans alone bear the image of God (Genesis 1:27). We’re unique from the animals not because we ate a higher caloric diet that allowed our brains to grow or because we stumbled across tool use and were able to start consuming bone marrow as we smashed open bones left by carnivores—no, we’re unique because humans were created in the very image of God (Genesis 1:26–27).

"

 

[KV-44-v1]

I

answersingenesis.org
crev.info
carm.org
creation.com

 

[KV-44-v1]

rae.org
Barbarian
rae.org rae.org

 

[kbmonday]

As a daddy of 3 I have noticed an important observation. My children being raised in the Word, including a literal reading of creation, has given them a strong foundation upon which to stand. In school they are taught the theory of evolution. When they have asked me about this I have given each one my opinion, what the Bible says, what Darwin stated as a way to falsify his theory and multiple sources for them to look for the evidence. They have, in turn, taught me that Newtonian logic would have led us into an age of intellect and reason if that system were true. Has this happened? Are we now a more reasonable and logical society since the removal of biblical truth from education? Or have we descended into illogic and perversion? I will continue to raise my children in the Truth of God's word, and not the ever-changing 'truth' of godless reason.

 

[Barbarian]

By definition, they were SDA. It's an SDA doctrine.

Nope. Refuted that already.

Denial is not refutation. As you now realize, YE creationism was invented by the SDAs.

K2K Evolution was made by pagans. then darwin picked up their bad legacy.

As you learned, Darwin attributed the origin of life to God. You've trusted the wrong people on that one.

Ellen was an SDA, and she invented YE creationism, which was adopted by the SDAs, so YE is an SDA doctrine.

This is not a rebuttal

It's a fact.

Yes, the fact that YEC fell into the SDA trap in the past ...

Confirms where YE creationism was invented.

Remember Biologos. Most Christians before old earthism was invented believe it was a real week.

Over 1500 years ago, St. Augustine pointed out that there was no way to convert the "days" to literal 24-hour days. C'mon.

God will save us.

Read Matthew 25. The instructions for spending eternity with Jesus are therein.

Darwin's great discovery was not evolution. He discovered how it worked.

Which one?

Biological evolution.