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

[KV-44-v1]

"He had been convinced by a Seventh-Day Adventist missionary to accept the visions of their "prophetess"."

So he COMPROMISED his Christian beliefs!

And you do similar, by trying to mingle bioevo with the Bible's CREATION account.
You accept the "visions" of these "scientists" that have an "a priori commitment to naturalism" (look it up) !!

 

[KV-44-v1]

Oh, so a geneticist who concludes that humans share a common ancestry with other primates can also be a Christian.

Techincally, yes. Thiestic evolution.
But it is quite unstable, is not recommended. Biblical Christianity is better.

"Since they're inanimate objects that don't reproduce, no. You didn't know that?"
Does a factory that makes factories evolve?? (a cell is like a factory)
If a simple manmade object won't evolve, then the more complex things God CLEARLY created NOT to evolve won't either.

Evolution violates "after their kind". You simply don't get hippoes from whales. Or birds from dinoes. They are different kinds. And anything that cold be clearly shown to be a transitional form would violate that. All supposed transitional forms, somewhere, have been debunked. Even archeopteryx!! God DESIGNED all original created kinds of creatures - none evolved. All animals today come from the original designs.

All species of animals come from the original created kinds. You'll never see the species "evolve" into the original created kinds.

 

[KV-44-v1]

Like what?

"Similarity = evo!!"

 

[Uncle J]

Techincally, yes. Thiestic evolution.
But it is quite unstable, is not recommended. Biblical Christianity is better.

That would seem to be a personal preference.

Does a factory that makes factories evolve?? (a cell is like a factory)
If a simple manmade object won't evolve, then the more complex things God CLEARLY created NOT to evolve won't either.

Seriously? You honestly think that since inanimate objects don't evolve, that means living organisms can't either?

Evolution violates "after their kind". You simply don't get hippoes from whales. Or birds from dinoes. They are different kinds.

So how do you account for the fact that the vast, vast majority of the world's scientists have concluded otherwise, with many of them being Christians?

Are they all terribly bad at their jobs? Are they all insane and/or delusional? Is it the biggest conspiracy in human history?

And anything that cold be clearly shown to be a transitional form would violate that. All supposed transitional forms, somewhere, have been debunked. Even archeopteryx!!

Says who, you? Are you a paleontologist? Have you conducted studies and analyses of fossil specimens?

What specifically qualifies you to make such a declaration about the findings of the world's professional paleontologists?

[All species of animals come from the original created kinds. You'll never see the species "evolve" into the original created kinds.

That doesn't really make sense. Are you saying species won't evolve "backwards" to their ancestral forms?

"Similarity = evo!!"

Do you have an example of scientists merely seeing similarity and concluding evolutionary relatedness based on that and nothing more?

 

[follower]

A car and a plane have tires, but do you assume they evolved?

On the nature channel sometimes they say =
a bird has wings.

Sometimes they say in sin, in error opposed to God =
a bird evolved wings.

 

[KV-44-v1]

The Earth brought forth living things. Not poofed, but made by natural means. Evolution just explains how that happened.

God commanded it to. One time occasion. No evolution, just supernatural creation.
When God appeared to Moses in the Burning Bush, is He still appearing in the Burning Bush??

Wrong. God is no mere "designer." Humans must design. God creates. Have some respect for God. And as you learned, evolution is observed happening in all populations, including humans. Would you like some examples?

Just looked up the def. Ok, so He is The Creator, Who formed life withOUT needing preexisting matter. No pre-planning, etc. needed.
But thiestic evolution implies that He is a "mere cobbler". Who cobbled things together with evolution. Your advice applies more to you.


Also, I don't think that God created more souls after the Seventh Day.

Genesis 2:1-3
"And so the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their heavenly lights. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because on it He rested from all His work which God had created and made."

Biblically, I just can't get the notion of "God is still creating" into my head.

 

[follower]

Biblically, I just can't get the notion of "God is still creating" into my head.

No worries , at least possibly , - Yhvh is still able to create. Yeshua is still unchanged and unchanging - and can raise the dead and can heal the sick.

The worry is the temptation to think sinfully that God gave man a brain to do these things. Man separated from God claims sinfully an ability to do things that are directly sinful , even proceeding from sinful inside man, without sinning.
This is very common, universal almost, in death dealing society/mankind.

 

[Uncle J]

On the nature channel sometimes they say =
a bird has wings.

Sometimes they say in sin, in error opposed to God =
a bird evolved wings.

So if we see organisms evolve characteristics right before our eyes, is that "in sin, in error, opposed to God"?

 

[KV-44-v1]

That would seem to be a personal preference.

Based on logic and my support for the Bible.

Seriously? You honestly think that since inanimate objects don't evolve, that means living organisms can't either?

Yes. You also don't assume that computer code "evolves".

So how do you account for the fact that the vast, vast majority of the world's scientists have concluded otherwise

Peer pressure, censorship, and much material possessions/$$$ & reputation to lose from saying otherwise, much to gain from following, among the factors.

They buy into "Has God said?" and so their trust in the Bible's CLEAR history is shaken.

with many of them being Christians?

source?

Are they all terribly bad at their jobs?
Are they all insane and/or delusional?
Is it the biggest conspiracy in human history?

No. Not all. Just that they are fallible.

Says who, you? Are you a paleontologist? Have you conducted studies and analyses of fossil specimens?

No, says logic. I don't need to have a PHD to know that kinds' DNA into other kinds DNA over ANY span of times contradicts the Bible.

What specifically qualifies you to make such a declaration about the findings of the world's professional paleontologists?

Nothing needs to. Which findings?

That doesn't really make sense. Are you saying species won't evolve "backwards" to their ancestral forms?

They won't because they can't. If evolution were true, that would be one of my predictions.
But we don't know what they were like, they have gone downhill since the Fall.
And there was the Global Flood. But we are not debating on the nature or existence of the Flood in this thread.

Do you have an example of scientists merely seeing similarity and concluding evolutionary relatedness based on that and nothing more?

Not only on that 1 thing. I see similarity as evidence of God using similar body structures & DNA. Creation, though - no evo.

 

[KV-44-v1]

No worries , at least possibly , - Yhvh is still able to create. Yeshua is still unchanged and unchanging - and can raise the dead and can heal the sick.

The worry is the temptation to think sinfully that God gave man a brain to do these things. Man separated from God claims sinfully an ability to do things that are directly sinful , even proceeding from sinful inside man, without sinning.
This is very common, universal almost, in death dealing society/mankind.

True.

I'll clarify, though.

IS. 'Is' means that He is still doing it.

I'm not saying that God "can't" create things today.

Every time in the Bible that God has created, I remember it was 1-time. Not something continuous.

 

[Barbarian]

Everything operating under physics ultimately winds down. 1st and 2nd laws.

So why are babies born, plants germinate from seeds, rivers keep running, etc.? You don't have a clue about thermodynamics, and that took you down this time.

I'll ask again. Name me one process required for evolution that is ruled out by thermodynamic laws. Prediction: we won't get an answer this time, either.

What do you believe that the processes needed are?

You don't know, do you? Again, not knowing what you're talking about has taken you down.

 

[KV-44-v1]

So if we see organisms evolve characteristics right before our eyes, is that "in sin, in error, opposed to God"?

We won't see it because the laws of physics prevent such.

 

[Barbarian]

So if we see organisms evolve characteristics right before our eyes, is that "in sin, in error, opposed to God"?

Today's winner.

 

[KV-44-v1]

So why are babies born, plants germinate from seeds, rivers keep running, etc.?

You mentioned something about lightning earlier. Why does lightning strike? All attributable to physics.

You don't have a clue about thermodynamics, and that took you down this time.

The first law of thermodynamics is a formulation of the law of conservation of energy in the context of thermodynamic processes. The law distinguishes two principal forms of energy transfer, heat and thermodynamic work, that modify a thermodynamic system containing a constant amount of matter. Wikipedia

The second law of thermodynamics is a physical law based on universal empirical observation concerning heat and energy interconversions. A simple statement of the law is that heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder regions of matter.
For example, the first law allows the process of a cup falling off a table and breaking on the floor, as well as allowing the reverse process of the cup fragments coming back together and 'jumping' back onto the table, while the second law allows the former and denies the latter.

bioevo DOESNT align with TD!!
We always see the average info in genes go DOWN, NOT up. Up would be like the cup "evolving" itself!!

I'll ask again. Name me one process required for evolution that is ruled out by thermodynamic laws. Prediction: we won't get an answer this time, either.

You assume that I need to rule out a process and not the "result".

You don't know, do you? Again, not knowing what you're talking about has taken you down.

I'm asking you what you believe they are.

 

[Barbarian]

The Earth brought forth living things. Not poofed, but made by natural means. Evolution just explains how that happened.

One time occasion. No evolution, just supernatural creation.

That's what you added to Genesis to make His word acceptable to you. Bad idea. Why not just believe what He says?

Just looked up the def. Ok, so He is The Creator, Who formed life withOUT needing preexisting matter. No pre-planning, etc. needed.

So no mere "designer." An omnipotent Creator, who made the world so as to bring forth life as He intended. Set your pride aside and let it be His way.

But thiestic evolution implies that He is a "mere cobbler".

Nope. Christians accept that God created the earth to bring forth life and for life to change as needed to survive. God isn't some little Middle Eastern fertility godling who prances around making a tree here and a rabbit there. He's the Creator. God is much greater and wiser than creationists would like Him to be.

Also, I don't think that God created more souls after the Seventh Day.

So you weren't created after the sixth day? What you wish, does not obligate God to obey.

Biblically, I just can't get the notion of "God is still creating" into my head.

He says he does. Why not just believe Him.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

Notice, present tense, not past tense. Please, just accept it God's way.

 

[follower]

True.

I'll clarify, though.

IS. 'Is' means that He is still doing it.

I'm not saying that God "can't" create things today.

Every time in the Bible that God has created, I remember it was 1-time. Not something continuous.

To be continued , God WIlling, in a thread without those who mock God, if possible.
footnote: Did God Create blue whales? Sparrows ?
After God created them, does God provide food for them ?
Do not all the creatures look to God for their daily food, daily, ongoing .....as written ....
Do not sinners sin daily, ongoing, as written ....
Yet food is provided for them also....

 

[KV-44-v1]

So if we see organisms evolve characteristics right before our eyes, is that "in sin, in error, opposed to God"?

Wing evolution is assumption. Guess about the past. They weren't there when God created the birds.

 

[KV-44-v1]

The Earth brought forth living things. Not poofed, but made by natural means. Evolution just explains how that happened.

Addressed already. Repetition =/= truth.

That's what you added to Genesis to make His word acceptable to you. Bad idea. Why not just believe what He says?

What did i add and how?? Explain?? It's you who add evolution because kinds after kinds. Not "kinds evolve into different kinds".
How is a plain reading of Scripture 'revising'? There is no revision needed, that is literally WHY creationism EXISTS.

If you are gonna take God's Word as nonliteral at Genesis, because of modern notions like evolution, why not discard sin and the Resurrection as nonliteral? You've revised evoism into the Bible, why not apply your illogic to the rest of the Bible? Intense backpedaling and worldizing of the Bible is needed to try and prop up bioevo. God is not the Author of confusion, but Theistic Evo apparently believe otherwise!!

So no mere "designer." An omnipotent Creator, who made the world so as to bring forth life as He intended. Set your pride aside and let it be His way.

So you admit that God is the Creator Who INSTANTLY created and not a weak cobbler who cobbles with evolution?? Hooray!!

 

[Uncle J]

Yes. You also don't assume that computer code "evolves".

Wow, I'm not even sure what to say. I guess if your idea of "logic" includes "since inanimate objects don't evolve, living organisms can't either", I'll just let that speak for itself.

Peer pressure, censorship

Do you have examples? And how specifically do you know those things go on in the scientific world? Are you a scientist?

and much material possessions/$$$ & reputation to lose from saying otherwise

First of all, I'm a biologist and I can assure you the vast, vast majority of us are neither rich nor famous. In fact, the first thing I was told when I expressed interest in going into biology was "you're not going to get rich".

Second, there are all sorts of wealthy and famous creationists, so reality directly contradicts your argument.

They buy into "Has God said?" and so their trust in the Bible's CLEAR history is shaken.

Have you ever read the writings of the 19th century Christian geologists on how they had to conclude that there was no global flood? It wasn't a conclusion they took lightly and it was quite painful for some. But being good scientists, they had to go where the evidence led, regardless of what the Bible said.

source?

Ever hear of Dr. Francis Collins?

Francis Collins - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Kenneth Miller?

Kenneth R. Miller - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No. Not all. Just that they are fallible.

As are you, correct? So it could very well be that you're wrong (e.g., you're interpreting the Bible incorrectly).

No, says logic. I don't need to have a PHD to know that kinds' DNA into other kinds DNA over ANY span of times contradicts the Bible.

Right, your position isn't based on a thorough understanding of genetics, but instead is simply "if it contradicts the Bible, it's wrong, period".

Nothing needs to. Which findings?

So you have zero qualifications to speak authoritatively about paleontology. Try and keep that in mind.

And the "findings" would be the existence of transitional fossils.

They won't because they can't. If evolution were true, that would be one of my predictions.

Looks like Barbarian is correct....your ignorance of the science you're trying to argue against isn't doing you any favors.

Not only on that 1 thing.

Thanks for admitting your error.

 

[Uncle J]

We won't see it because the laws of physics prevent such.

Well then you're just plain wrong. We see populations evolve new characteristics all the time. Heck, I did an experiment as an undergrad where we watched a population evolve resistance to an antibiotic.

CLICK HERE for a ton of examples of populations evolving new characteristics.

And I have to wonder....if you really believe no evolution of new characteristics has ever occurred, how then do you account for things like bacterial resistance to our antibiotics? Did God give that to them?