-
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
-
-
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
[_ Old Earth _] The surprising logical minds of babies
- Thread starter Sparkey
- Start date
Barbarian
Member
- Jun 5, 2003
- 33,208
- 2,513
What is remarkable is how well we have been fitted to reality. It's no accident. Those who were able to make a logical inference about tall grass moving when there was no wind, tended to eat and avoid being eaten. So we're remarkably good at inferring things from patterns of data. Sometimes too good. An excessive tendency to find reasons for perceived patterns leads to paranoia.
But that takes care of itself, too. Natural selection leads to being good at this, but not too good.
God knew what He was doing, when He created the universe.
But that takes care of itself, too. Natural selection leads to being good at this, but not too good.
God knew what He was doing, when He created the universe.
Jesus' Follower
Member
- Aug 31, 2015
- 194
- 28
Very true - I cannot add any usual data which would improve this statement.
I dont think God is a big beleiver in "natural selection" (in context :evolution) with texts like this... I think he is in far more control than any of us realize.
Luke 12:6
Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God
“Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.” (Matthew 10:29-31)
Revelation 4:11
“Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”
Romans 8:28 - And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to [his] purpose
Last edited:
Barbarian: can you tell me what's wrong with the concept of God creating a wide variety of fully formed creatures as Genesis describes ready to reproduce after their "kind" and with a built in genetic variation that is able to handle an incredable amount of stressors( ie enviroment, food type, etc..). The fossil record shows this, we see this today, and Genesis tell us is is the way it is. Why do you assume macro evolution when micro is all we ever see and all the earth ever shows? The evidence supports Genesis.
Barbarian
Member
- Jun 5, 2003
- 33,208
- 2,513
Scripture doesn't say that. And such a belief is inconsistent with the evidence. For example, Adam and Eve could have had, at most four different alleles for any particular gene locus. But humans today have dozens, many of them useful for particular environments. All the rest had to have evolved by mutation.
Take the "cat kind"; they have a huge genetic variation, and it is physically impossible for any cat to have had all that variation, for the reason discussed above. They evolved. And the evidence is that all the carnivora had a common ancestor, from genetic, molecular, anatomical, and fossil evidence. Why should anyone believe a non-scriptural doctrine which is directly contradicted by reality?
No. We see gradual evolution of various modern lines of organisms. If God just poofed them into existence, we wouldn't see all those transitionals in the fossil record. And we wouldn't see the nested hierarchy of taxa that was first discovered by Linnaeus, and later confirmed by DNA analysis. And we know this works, because we can test it on organisms of known descent.
No. We see nature continuing to evolve new organisms, speciation, and new alleles not seen before.
Genesis does not support creationism. It is somewhat like other Middle Eastern creation stories, but notice that it doesn't have a nature god running here and there, creating things one at a time; Instead the real Creator produced the universe, and it brought forth living things as He intended.
Directly observed. New species appear from time to time. Sometimes, we've been lucky enough to document it.
The ICR admits new species, genera, and familes evolve. Actually, they don't like the word "evolve", but they still admit it.
It does. But Genesis doesn't support creationism.
Genesis doesn't support creationism. Oh dear barbarian. What does Genesis talk about then?
Dawkins, Richard, the Blind Watch Maker ( New York: W.W. Norton, 1987)
P. 229 "..... The Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years [evolutionists are now dating the beginning of the Cambrian at about 530 million years], are the oldest in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists."
turnorburn
Member
- Nov 21, 2007
- 8,713
- 462
Genesis most certainly does support creationism..
Psalm 33:8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
The winds of science may have damaged your rudder my friend..
tob
Psalm 33:8 Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him.
9 For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.
The winds of science may have damaged your rudder my friend..
tob
Barbarian
Member
- Jun 5, 2003
- 33,208
- 2,513
Creation. Something diametrically opposed to creationism, just as science is diametrically opposed to scientism.
God made a world were life comes from non-life, and all things come about from His initial creation. Those "invisible things, clearly seen" that St. Paul tells us about. The world itself can show us about God, if we are inclined to see it.
turnorburn
Member
- Nov 21, 2007
- 8,713
- 462
Life doesn't come from non life it comes from God who is life the evolutionary theory comes from non life a doctrine that comes from man..
tob
turnorburn
Member
- Nov 21, 2007
- 8,713
- 462
If you leave sin out of the equation then i suppose you'd read it that way, that's one of the reasons the evolutionist fails to have a solid foundation..
Luke 20:38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
tob
Luke 20:38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
tob
Barbarian
Member
- Jun 5, 2003
- 33,208
- 2,513
Clearly it's not poofing things into existence. As God says, it's the earth bringing forth life as He created it to do. Understand the context. The usual explanation for life in most Middle Eastern religions of the time was some fertility god or goddess roaming around, poofing living things into existence. That is not what Genesis says. It takes the context that would make sense to the children of Abraham, but it makes a change. God doesn't do it directly; He makes the earth and the Earth brings forth life. Because this God is the real thing, and he doesn't have to poof anything. It's all His creation, and it does what He created it to do.
I disagree. That's not what Genesis says, and it's not even logical. God did it directly; Scripture is very clear on this. How does one invision the actual creation in the below verses? I like *poof* ;-). This has nothing to do with middle Eastern religions. Just as Jesus pulled endless fish from a basket, so did the Father create the world we see. Right out of thin air.
20Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.” 21God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. 25God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
The evidence of micro-evolution (small allowable changes in a creature within pre-ordained limits after the initial creation) is everywhere.
Why would God go to all the trouble of making the creation flow from a macro-evolution matrix when making it at all at one time, ready to go, "turn key" if you will, would suffice.? Jesus's miracles favour abrupt sudden changes not long drawn out process. Highly inefficient. God is able to do just what he says in Genesis.
Even Dawkins sees the evidence of abrupt appearance. The old chicken and egg comes to mind... Here's the answer, He created the chicken fully formed and it went on to lay eggs....no need to complicate things...
Why would Adam be given the he task of naming all the animals if they were in early transitional stages?
Was adam even a real man Barbarian?
http://www.icr.org/article/should-we-expect-find-transitional-forms-fossil-re/
Snip >>> When we look at the invertebrates, we see separate and distinct categories (i.e., clams, corals, trilobites, etc.) existing in the earliest strata with no hint of ancestors or of intermediates. We find clams by the trillions, with a lot of variety among them, but no evolution. Furthermore, we have no idea how vertebrate fish could have arisen from any invertebrate. Where there are good data, we see no evolution. Where the data are scanty, evolutionists can tell a story. The fossil record is voluminous and apparently substantially complete. Yet no evolution is seen.
Speaking of this issue, Darwin wrote in an 1881 letter that "the case at present must remain inexplicable and may be truly argued as a valid argument against the views here entertained." Evolution—a theory of change without any evidence of change.
20Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.” 21God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. 25God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
The evidence of micro-evolution (small allowable changes in a creature within pre-ordained limits after the initial creation) is everywhere.
Why would God go to all the trouble of making the creation flow from a macro-evolution matrix when making it at all at one time, ready to go, "turn key" if you will, would suffice.? Jesus's miracles favour abrupt sudden changes not long drawn out process. Highly inefficient. God is able to do just what he says in Genesis.
Even Dawkins sees the evidence of abrupt appearance. The old chicken and egg comes to mind... Here's the answer, He created the chicken fully formed and it went on to lay eggs....no need to complicate things...
Why would Adam be given the he task of naming all the animals if they were in early transitional stages?
Was adam even a real man Barbarian?
http://www.icr.org/article/should-we-expect-find-transitional-forms-fossil-re/
Snip >>> When we look at the invertebrates, we see separate and distinct categories (i.e., clams, corals, trilobites, etc.) existing in the earliest strata with no hint of ancestors or of intermediates. We find clams by the trillions, with a lot of variety among them, but no evolution. Furthermore, we have no idea how vertebrate fish could have arisen from any invertebrate. Where there are good data, we see no evolution. Where the data are scanty, evolutionists can tell a story. The fossil record is voluminous and apparently substantially complete. Yet no evolution is seen.
Speaking of this issue, Darwin wrote in an 1881 letter that "the case at present must remain inexplicable and may be truly argued as a valid argument against the views here entertained." Evolution—a theory of change without any evidence of change.
No, evolution is the revision of Gods creation. Evolution (macro) is all in minds of men,,,