[__ Science __ ] Some Thoughts On The Religion Of Evolution.

[Truthfrees]

Yes. But "land" is different than "world."

"Continents" is your addition to His world. As you see, he flooded the land, (erets)but never said that the whole world (tevel) was flooded.

"Erets" means pretty much what "land" means in our language; it is never used for the whole world.

still missing the point - all the land was covered with water so that there was no visible land - there was only water visible

 

[Truthfrees]

Macro evolution has no evidence for it and plenty against it. You cannot tell me that one prokaryotic cell had all of the genetic information for every living thing that ever existed and yet did not demonstrate any of these genetic traits. If all life had a common ancestor it would of necessity have to be a much higher life form than any we have discovered. Not the lowest. Natural selection within a closed community of organisms is always a process of losing genetic information as nature removes those who carry unbeneficial genes.

so true -

 

[Truthfrees]

Your fellow creationists who happen to know what the evidence is, disagree with you.

fellow non-evolutionary creationists agree with all of us non-evolutionary creationists that creation best fits the evidence

otherwise they would be evolutionists like you

 

[Truthfrees]

Gravity effects can be observed and repeat tested in the present. Not so with your belief in fish ancestry. Unobserved and cannot be fact-checked against what actually happened. With fish lineage, you are assuming facts not in evidence.
Trivial changes in bird beaks does not get you to fish lineage, anymore than swallowing a fish stick gets us to swallowing a whale.

So it can be fiction and scientific. Agree. Apply that to your belief in fish lineage. It can be scientific and fiction at the same time in the same relationship.

great points

 

[Barbarian]

Your fellow creationists who happen to know what the evidence is, disagree with you.

fellow non-evolutionary creationists agree with all of us non-evolutionary creationists that creation best fits the evidence

Unless they actually know the evidence. Then even they admit the evidence for macroevolutionary theory is very good. Would you like me to show you, again?

otherwise they would be evolutionists like you

No, they are honest creationists. They admit that the evidence for evolutionary theory is very good, but they prefer their particular understanding of Genesis. And you can't fault them for that.

 

[Barbarian]

still missing the point - all the land was covered with water so that there was no visible land - there was only water visible

The land was covered, just not the entire world. If the whole world had been flooded, the Bible would have said so. What ever the land that was covered, it wasn't the whole world, according to God.

If for example, you were in the center of the Black Sea, and looked to the narrowest distance, the curvature of the Earth in that distance (maybe 150 miles) would be almost three miles. You would see nothing but water.

It happens that there was a great flood that filled the Black Sea basin about the right time for Noah's Flood, so that's a real possibility.

 

[Barbarian]

You merely cherry-picked two of the many possible meanings out of Strong's. Now if you want to tell us that the translation of the Bibles that we now have are in error, I'd be willing to hear your reasoning. What do you have?

 

[Cygnus]

I directly gave you answers that (so far as I know) all Christian consider to be true. I just didn't add any embellishments. You shouldn't expect any, or do any additions yourself.



I can't explain it in gravity-terms, either. Or atom-terms, or plate tectonic-terms. The message in Genesis is about God and man and our relationship, not scientific things. If faith won't do it, for you, science can't help.

i know, you can't explain the fall...that's why I consider what you post on the subject is bogus.
You try to filter it through the false religion of evolutionism and come up lacking.

 

[Cygnus]

Creationist students, listen to me very carefully: There is evidence for evolution, and evolution is an extremely successful scientific theory. That doesn't make it ultimately true, and it doesn't mean that there could not possibly be viable alternatives. It is my own faith choice to reject evolution, because I believe the Bible reveals true information about the history of the earth that is fundamentally incompatible with evolution. I am motivated to understand God's creation from what I believe to be a biblical, creationist perspective. Evolution itself is not flawed or without evidence. Please don't be duped into thinking that somehow evolution itself is a failure. Please don't idolize your own ability to reason. Faith is enough. If God said it, that should settle it.

Evolution has no explanation or reason for the fall. Do you understand that? Seriously, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

 

[Cygnus]

Yes. But "land" is different than "world."



"Continents" is your addition to His world. As you see, he flooded the land, (erets)but never said that the whole world (tevel) was flooded.

"Erets" means pretty much what "land" means in our language; it is never used for the whole world.

Phewwwwww, Good news...we read ...2 Peter 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

Yes, great news, if the flood was local...so will be the fire.

Barb....don't you believe the bible?

 

[Barbarian]

Phewwwwww, Good news...we read ...2 Peter 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

You missed it again... you see, "world" used in Peter is not the Hebrew "tevel", but the koine Greek "κόσμος" which was, by that time used to describe the Roman Empire...

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

Cygnus....don't you believe the bible?

 

[Barbarian]

Evolution has no explanation or reason for the fall.

Gravity has no explanation or reason for the fall.
Chemistry has no explanation or reason for the fall.
Geology has no explanation or reason for the fall.

That's because it was a spiritual event, not a physical one, and therefore not accessible to science.
Do you understand that? Seriously, Do you understand that?

 

[Barbarian]

i know, you can't explain the fall...

I just did. Adam and Eve disobeyed him; that's what I told you.

You just don't want to accept it. That's why I consider what you post on the subject to be in serious error.

You try to filter it through the false doctrine of creationism and come up lacking.

 

[Cygnus]

You missed it again... you see, "world" used in Peter is not the Hebrew "tevel", but the koine Greek "κόσμος" which was, by that time used to describe the Roman Empire...

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

Cygnus....don't you believe the bible?

I truly thought you would have figured it out by now...but you haven't. Let me help you out..

As led Zeppelin says....
There's a sign on the wall
But she wants to be sure
'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings

So, what you then have to do Barbarian is look at context. You have to look at the way people speak. you have to look at how the flood is presented in Gen...How the "tevel" is described...and the entire globe come to mind. But you disagree with the bible and want to make it into some sort of local flood.

The biblical distortion is amazing when the old earthers try to horse shoe the bible into a false narration. Sheeze, days ..yom...needs to be re-understood...and most of all...something I've been waiting for is an explaination of the fall. You know ...who fell. Why did they fall...when did the fall...where did they fall...but so far all you have done is provide extremelly shallow answers to the question and then pretend to have answered it.

When did "man" receive its soul/spirit? Questions old earth theology guys draw a blank face on....oh, BTW, to make it completely straight for you..when I say old earth I don't mean a partial earth.

 

[Cygnus]

Gravity has no explanation or reason for the fall.
Chemistry has no explanation or reason for the fall.
Geology has no explanation or reason for the fall.

That's because it was a spiritual event, not a physical one, and therefore not accessible to science.
Do you understand that? Seriously, Do you understand that?

I said evolution has no reason for the fall..and once again you side stepped the issue. Are you running for a political office? You non-answers seem to indicate that.

As you very well know when I mentioned evolutionism I was asking about when in mans evolution did the fall happen. Why did the fall happen? Did it happen to all the proto-humans at once or did it take thousands of years? Did it happen to just one proto-human then spread? Come on Barbarian, what does your theo-evo faith say about the issue? Can you answer? will you answer or once again dodge the question?

 

[Cygnus]

I just did. Adam and Eve disobeyed him; that's what I told you.

You just don't want to accept it. That's why I consider what you post on the subject to be in serious error.

You try to filter it through the false doctrine of creationism and come up lacking.

OK, Adam and Eve disobeyed God. Who were Adam and Eve? Were they they the two most highly evolved..now humans...in the entire population? Were they two evolved photo-humans that found favor with God?

It's obvious if they evolved Eve wasn't formed from Adams rib..nor was Adam formed from the dust the breathed a spirit into Adam where he bacame a living being. But you bend the bible and force it to conform to evoism...all the while failing to explain the details of the fall..completely ignoring the narrative scripture sets up in favor of something else...something else you can't explain. Something you can't explain because your theology concerning the creation of man is built upon falsehoods.

 

[Truthfrees]

Your fellow creationists who happen to know what the evidence is, disagree with you.
Unless they actually know the evidence. Then even they admit the evidence for macroevolutionary theory is very good. Would you like me to show you, again?

No, they are honest creationists. They admit that the evidence for evolutionary theory is very good, but they prefer their particular understanding of Genesis. And you can't fault them for that.

The land was covered, just not the entire world. If the whole world had been flooded, the Bible would have said so. What ever the land that was covered, it wasn't the whole world, according to God.

If for example, you were in the center of the Black Sea, and looked to the narrowest distance, the curvature of the Earth in that distance (maybe 150 miles) would be almost three miles. You would see nothing but water.

It happens that there was a great flood that filled the Black Sea basin about the right time for Noah's Flood, so that's a real possibility.

wow - you have proof of all this? no?

evolution is a theory

creation is God's doing

He created time space matter and everything else

evolutionists have no idea where time space matter and everything else came from

your theory is not supported by the evidence as well or as diversely as creation is

your quotes from your "creationists" who support evolution are not convincing

if you look at evolution honestly you will see there are swiss cheese holes in it

creation has no holes

you won't be able to convince me evolution is true because i already saw the holes, went looking for truth, and found God

 

[Cygnus]

I just did. Adam and Eve disobeyed him; that's what I told you.

You just don't want to accept it. That's why I consider what you post on the subject to be in serious error.

You try to filter it through the false doctrine of creationism and come up lacking.

Barbarian...I DON'T DENY THAT...but, that's where you stopped. I asked who were Adam and Eve?

Was Adam formed from the dust then Eve from his rib?
...what's yor non-biblcal spin?

How did they disobey? Was it an entire population that was the they or simply 2 people? There is so much you can't explain...and distort the fall with your biblical factless assumptions.


I completely understand your lack of abilty to communicate the fall and what happened...because you have no reasons, no answers, no explanations. The reason for the theo-evo need of a savior is based upon a shoulder shrug.

 

[Barbarian]

Was Adam formed from the dust then Eve from his rib?

Taking the allegory of Genesis as a literal history is your non-scriptural spin. And yes, as St. Paul notes, the Bible has allegories about real people.

How did they disobey?

They did something God told them to not do. Does it matter what that was? You're fastening to bits of the story, and avoiding the actual message.

Was it an entire population that was the they or simply 2 people?

Two people. The first two given living souls.

There is so much you can't explain...

Yes. God left out a lot of things that He didn't intend to tell us.

By refusing to accept the allegory and what it actually says, you're making up your own story, and distorting the fall with your biblical factless assumptions.

 

[Barbarian]

wow - you have proof of all this?

Yep. As you learned, "erets" just means "land." "Tevel" means the whole world. And God says that the flood covered land, not the whole world.

evolution is a theory

No. Evolution is an observed phenomenon, like gravity. There are theories that explain these phenomena. A theory is a testable idea that has been repeatedly confirmed by evidence. Many people confuse the phenomenon with the theory, or with consequences of evolution.

creation is God's doing

Right. You just don't approve of the way He did some of it.

evolutionists have no idea where time space matter and everything else came from

Darwin just thought God did it. Evolutionary theory isn't about the origin of the universe, or the origin of life. It's just about the way existing life changes over time. It's common error with creationists.

your theory is not supported by the evidence as well or as diversely as creation is

Knowledgeable creationists disagree with you:

Evidences for Darwin’s second expectation — of stratomorphic intermediate species — include such species as Baragwanathia27 (between rhyniophytes and lycopods), Pikaia28 (between echinoderms and chordates), Purgatorius29 (between the tree shrews and the primates), and Proconsul30 (between the non-hominoid primates and the hominoids). Darwin’s third expectation — of higher-taxon stratomorphic intermediates — has been confirmed by such examples as the mammal-like reptile groups31 between the reptiles and the mammals, and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed ancestors. Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series — has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33 the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 the various mammal series of the Cenozoic37 (for example, the horse series, the camel series, the elephant series, the pig series, the titanothere series, etc.), the Cantius and Plesiadapus primate series,38 and the hominid series.39Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact. It certainly CANNOT be said that traditional creation theory expected (predicted) any of these fossil finds.
YE Creationist Dr. Kurt Wise Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms

Evolution is not a theory in crisis. It is not teetering on the verge of collapse. It has not failed as a scientific explanation. There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well.

I say these things not because I'm crazy or because I've "converted" to evolution. I say these things because they are true. I'm motivated this morning by reading yet another clueless, well-meaning person pompously declaring that evolution is a failure. People who say that are either unacquainted with the inner workings of science or unacquainted with the evidence for evolution. (Technically, they could also be deluded or lying, but that seems rather uncharitable to say. Oops.)

Creationist students, listen to me very carefully: There is evidence for evolution, and evolution is an extremely successful scientific theory. That doesn't make it ultimately true, and it doesn't mean that there could not possibly be viable alternatives. It is my own faith choice to reject evolution, because I believe the Bible reveals true information about the history of the earth that is fundamentally incompatible with evolution. I am motivated to understand God's creation from what I believe to be a biblical, creationist perspective. Evolution itself is not flawed or without evidence. Please don't be duped into thinking that somehow evolution itself is a failure. Please don't idolize your own ability to reason.
YE creationist Dr. Todd Wood

The truth about evolution

A blog about the creation/evolution debate from the president of Core Academy of Science.

toddcwood.blogspot.com

your quotes from your "creationists" who support evolution are not convincing

They actually know what they are talking about. They are PhD scientists, familiar with the evidence. And you aren't.

you won't be able to convince me evolution is true because i already saw the holes, went looking for truth, and found God

See above. You've obviously not investigated it, since you were unaware of the things your fellow YE creationists know about it. It's good that you've found God. But don't make an idol of you new doctrine of creationism.