Religion of Evolution

jcrawford, you know that Christianity is not being attacked. It is the argument against evolution that evolutionist have done evil things and therefore evolution is false that is being attacked.

 

One could argue that just because evolutionism is bad science and has nothing of substance to support it - it does not mean that some proof for it won't be found for it some day.

Indeed. But until then - why cling to the religion of evolutionism with all its bad guesswork and bad doctrines?

As Richard Dawkings points out - that is a grossly compromised position for any Christian to take since evolutionism claims to explain all that God does in terms of creating robust complex living planets.

I think all Christians who accept the accuracy of the "Account" the Creator gives in Genesis 1-2:3 and Exodus 20:8-11 - would have to agree.

This leaves Christian evolutionists in a hopelessly compromised position where Creationists and evolutionist expose the massive gap in their logic as they cling to BOTH the evolutionism of humanism and the Gospel of the Word of God.

I know this seems obvious to all - but it bears repeating.

In Christ,

Bob

 

jcrawford,

That doesn't look like taking the basic scientific theory of evolution and using it to prove the non-existence of God to me. Was it intended as such? If so, I will offer a critique of the reasoning.

 

Almost all forms of dating have their flaws. They make too many assumptions based upon the "law of uniformitarianism," and disregarding other events of history.

I do have some problems with some of the ones posting here. It is your logic. Since this is a forum for at least those who profess Christianity you must beieve at the very least in the exisence of God. If you believe that God exists, then what kind of God do you believe in? Is your God so anemic that He does not have the power or even the right to take on the name "Creator." If God exists, is he not powerful enough to create the world in six days as the Bible says he did.
Either the ones posting here believe in Christianity in general, or they are atheists. There is no middle ground. Evolution is the antithesis of the foundation of the Bible--Creation. God is our creator. Only an atheist would deny that fact. It is God Himself who calls that person a fool!

Psalms 14:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt. They have done abominable works. There is none who does good.

Evolution is its own religion void of real science that has replaced God with its "scientiscm."

As far as radiometric dating is concerned, as I mentioned it, along as other dating methods, are full of assumptions that make these methods very unreliable. I leave you with an excerpt from a grade 9 Christian textbook that answers your question about radiometric dating.

I hope that answers your questions about radioactive dating.
DHK

 

What is this "law of uniformitarianism" and what's wrong with it?

Why do you even ask a question like that? The debate is not about what God COULD do but what He DID do.

Pay closer attention. I profess that God is my creator. So do the rest of us posting on this board.

Evolution is only science, it is not religion.

Your grade 9 Christian textbook is full of assumptions that make its conclusions against science very unreliable.

From your book quotes:

Except, of course, when dating the Hawaiian islands and comparing the dates with the known rate of plate movement over the one volcano plume that formed the all; or when counting the annual layers in trees and comparing that with the carbon 14 dating of the wood; or counting the annual layers accumulating in the bottom of lakes and comparing that with the carbon 14 dating of the imbedded twigs; or when using several different elements in the same sample that would decay at different rates, allowing one to solver for a common intersection date for several independently derived sloping lines with results that would never come together if the daughter products were not all present (the isochron method)

Folks, looking at a rock to see what radioactive atoms are in it and what daughter products are in it is an observation. Where do these creationists come up with these wild ideas?

yes we do because it has been checked. Radioactive decay is observed in astronomy from starlight millions and even billions of years old to be perfectly consistent with what we see today.

Translation: There was scientific evidence for an old earth before radioactive decay methods were developed, and they only confirmed the truth of an older earth.

How much correction is needed from the actual data of tree rings? At the most, about 5%.

Bottom line: radioactive determination of the age of the earth and moon and the solar system remain good evidence for the age of the earth. Atoms do not lie. They keep God's timetable accurately and have revealed what God wanted us to find out when He put them there.

 

The law of unifomitarianism is defined for us in the Bible in 2 Peter 3

2 Peter 3:3-4 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, "all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

Notice:
#1. It is the scoffers (scorners, mockers, of God's Word) that believe in this law.
#2. All things have not continued the same as they were from the beginning of Creation. We have abundant evidence that they haven't. The worldwide flood is but one. When one examines data they must interpret according to their philosophical frame. Science cannot determine truth. It observes facts and draws concusions. Often its conclusions wrong. The Bible alone is truth. If your philosophical framework is evolution you will be wrong every time. If your philosophical frame work is the Bible you are bound to be right. Take the Grand Canyon for example. Evolution would have us believe that throughout millions of years the Colorado river slowly eroded away that vast rock and formed that huge canyon. Incredible! No, a Great Flood in a short period of time with a huge, tremendous force, bearing down upon that area of land formed that canyon. We observe the data around the canyon. We interpret according to our philosophical framework. One is humanistic and atheistic. One is Biblical and sets forth the truth that God has revealed to us. Not everything has continued (if anything) has continued the same from the beginning of creation. There have been cataclysms of various natures since the time of creation which the evolutionist does not take into consideration.

Then the answer is obvious. What He did do is written in the Book of Genesis, and this whole discussion is moot. If this is the discussion you want it should be centered around the first two chapters on Genesis. All the other information that you are bringing into this discussion are totally irrelevant to what God DID do. We already know what God did do. It is already recorded for us. That is why I posted what I did. Do you deliberately take the position of an atheist? For what reason?

You have really got my attention now. If you profess that God is your creator, then why don't you believe in creation? There is something wrong here. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Evolution and creation are on opposite sides of the pole. They don't mix. You have to believe in one or the other. You can't believe in both. You can't have two masters. Is your master the God of the Bible, or the god of evolution?

No, it is not science. It has put itself outside the realm of science when it deals with the realm of origins. Only relgion can do that. Science deals with observable facts; evolution does not (for the most part). If evolution dealt with that which can be observed we would see evolution taking place today, but we don't. We don't see the missing links--the half man and half ape running around. They are and always have been non-existent. There are no current missing links observable today. There is nothing in evolution that is observable. It is not science; it is religion--in the realm of metaphysics.

 

DHK

You are still using the verse in 2 Peter out of context. It is talking about people who doubt the prophocies of the end times because they have yet to happen.

 

2 Peter 3:3-4 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

The last days are now. The last days started with the ascension (or perhaps even the resurrection) of Christ. Peter and Paul were living in the last days. They were living with the expectation of the Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, and his imminent return.

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

This is Paul writing to Timothy in a pastoral epistle. He is advising Timothy that in the last days (occuring in his life time) perilous will come, and therefore be prepared for them. He would have no need to write this advice to Timothy if the expectation of it occurring would not be within the lifetime of Timothy.

The last days were from the time of the resurrection, lasting until the time of when Christ comes again. We live in the last times, and so did Paul. Of what century or millennia did you think Peter was prophesing of? If you think he was prophesying of another time, then you must be declaring yourself to be a prophet yourself--in that case a false one.
DHK

 

Notice that when you directly deal with the great contradiction between the doctrines of evolutionism and the Word of God - evolutionists fall silent.

They would rather play the rabbit-trail game of one failed claim after another in the fossil record. But on a Christian message board - you have to address "both problems" not just the bad science used to review the fossil record.

When Richard Dawkings deals directly with the subject of Christianity and evolution and the "bad marriage this makes" since in his words the claims of evolutionism cover all the Creative acts of God -- he deals with the subject of this thread.

And yet...

In Christ,

Bob

 

It is often the case that forgeries find ready acceptance among those religiously inclined to "believe" what the forgery promotes. (The Donation of Constantine comes to mind).

In the same way - the failed hopes of evolutionism's "faithful" have created the ideal climate for "hoaxes".

Notice.

Buyer beware.

In Christ,

Bob


In Christ,

Bob

 

DHK

You are arguing against the wrong part.

It is quite obvious that Paul is talking about the end times and not something that was close at hand at the time of the writing. You did not need to prove that. Where you are incorrectly using the verse is in applying it to unifomitarianism. "All things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation" means, in context, those who say that we have had these prophecies of the end of time for a very long time and nothing has ever happened so i do not believe they will come true at this point in time either. It is very evident.

I do not believe that you can provide ANY corroboration that Paul actually meant geology here. I would be just as justified as you to turn the verse around in support of my position. I could call YECers the "scoffers" mentioned here for insisting that the species have been constant and unchanging despite all the evidence to the contrary. See, Paul agrees with me.

 

The Word of God says that God created this earth "in six days".

Evolutionism teaches its followers to say "oh no He did not".

The Word of God says all life on land was destroyed by a world wide flood.

Evolutionism teaches its followers to say "oh no that is not what destroyed life on earth - it was a meteor and that meteor did not wipe out ALL life on land".

Repeatedly the speculations and guesswork of man are propped up against the Word of God - in ways that even Atheist evolutionists can "see" to be in direct contradiction to the Bible.

And yet...

In Christ,

Bob