Is Gen 1-3 "real" or is Atheist Darwinism "Real"?

[DHK]

The proponents of ID want to go straight from the conception of the idea to the classroom.

That is precisely what the evolutionist did. Why are you setting a different standard for the Creationist?

 

[Amy.G]

REW:

Next, I never have and never will demand that you accept evolution because obviously people like you see it as blasphemy and will always refuse to accept it, no matter the evidence. For me it's obvious, even without any observation, that organisms would have to change and adapt over billions of years. I'm a pretty avid bird watcher, and if you just look through a Peterson guide and see all the different, but very similar species, its very obvious that they are the effects of evolution.

These are variances. That doesn't prove evolution. Helen is much more qualified to answer these questions, but I will take my shot. From what I've learned about DNA (and I'm just a dumb ol country girl) it is a code. A code that can only be changed by the one who created it. It does not change all by itself as if it had a will. Similar to computer programming. The computer does what it is programmed to do and nothing more. DNA is information. Information can only come from a mind. Information does not create itself. Just as what I'm typing right now is information. Information is carried by various modes; a written letter, speaking, electrical impulses in cyber space, ect., but it always originates in a mind. The code of DNA is no different in that it is information, which originated in a mind. God's mind.

Genesis 1:11-12 (New King James Version)
11 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:21
21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:24
24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so.

Monkeys didn't change into humans. Reptiles didn't change into birds. God created everything to reproduce according to it's kind.

:godisgood: AMEN!

 

[Rew_10]

Monkeys didn't change into humans. Reptiles didn't change into birds. God created everything to reproduce according to it's kind.

No they didn't "change" into them and no evolutionist will claim that. We all just share common ancestors which is completely different. And what do you folks against evolution say to the fossil evidence of intermediate organisms?

 

[annsni]

yep - Have you ever seen a pig duck? I have - on a children's toy a few weeks ago when our pastor preached on this and that's the only place that will ever happen. Macroevolution is quite different than microevolution. Sure, the beak will affect how successful a certain bird will be in a certain environment - but a finch will never change into an eagle so that it can now eat meat. Nope, not gonna happen. Did you know that a dog will no be a cat (well, other than the cartoon CatDog!).

 

[ccrobinson]

Yes I am 19 year old, and an intelligent one at that.

The thing that amuses me most is that you joined this board with the intent of setting everybody straight and telling us all how things really are. Your tone definitely leaves something to be desired. I think there's value to be found in the creation vs. evolution debate, but you don't seem interested in debate. You seem to be more interested in a monologue, which is the exact opposite of the purpose of this forum.

I feel sure that God does not condone the Christian treatment of homosexuals in any way.

I'm not entirely sure what this non-sequitur has to do with creation vs. evolution.

 

[Amy.G]

No they didn't "change" into them and no evolutionist will claim that. We all just share common ancestors which is completely different. And what do you folks against evolution say to the fossil evidence of intermediate organisms?

Show me an intermediate dog or horse.

 

[Amy.G]

No they didn't "change" into them and no evolutionist will claim that. We all just share common ancestors which is completely different. And what do you folks against evolution say to the fossil evidence of intermediate organisms?

That's exactly what evolutionists claim. Humans began as apes or rats. Now we're humans. There had to be a change somewhere along the line.

 

[tragic_pizza]

Rew and Tragic - have either one of you seen Helen's husband's site and read through it? Have you read the site that I posted about - the one with the transcript of the video that I saw? There's awfully good science there. What IS sad is when science is completely turning away evidences when following those evidences HAVE to point to a designer. THAT is not good science.

When both of you have read both sites, then please come back. You are obviously not looking for any truth if you will not check these out.

You don't know me well enough to dismiss me, lady.

Edit to add: I didn't see a website cited by Helen.

 

[Rew_10]

That's exactly what evolutionists claim. Humans began as apes or rats. Now we're humans. There had to be a change somewhere along the line.

Amy, I'm not going to sit here and teach you evolution. Please just go read a book on it. "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins is a classic. I don't support Dawkins religious views, but he is an excellent biologist and writer.

 

[Amy.G]

Amy, I'm not going to sit here and teach you evolution. Please just go read a book on it. "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins is a classic. I don't support Dawkins religious views, but he is an excellent biologist and writer.

No thank you. I'll just read the Bible.

 

[Rew_10]

No thank you. I'll just read the Bible.

Then please feel free not to add your opinion on evolution.

 

[Rew_10]

The thing that amuses me most is that you joined this board with the intent of setting everybody straight and telling us all how things really are. Your tone definitely leaves something to be desired. I think there's value to be found in the creation vs. evolution debate, but you don't seem interested in debate. You seem to be more interested in a monologue, which is the exact opposite of the purpose of this forum.

I'm not entirely sure what this non-sequitur has to do with creation vs. evolution.

I have no intent on "setting everybody straight" ccrobinson. I personally have no problem denouncing evolution if the proper evidence against it is provided. I am definitely interested in debate, but as long as we debate within the bounds of reality and not the supernatural. I also find it very difficult to debate with people who deal in absolutes (i.e. The world was created in 6 days because God said so, and you can't change my mind!).

The comment on homosexuality wasn't meant to be part of the debate, but rather a reason why I felt that the Bible can't all be taken literally. And I also provided cited evidence for this, and will happily cite more.

 

[DHK]

Next, I never have and never will demand that you accept evolution because obviously people like you see it as blasphemy and will always refuse to accept it, no matter the evidence. For me it's obvious, even without any observation, that organisms would have to change and adapt over billions of years. I'm a pretty avid bird watcher, and if you just look through a Peterson guide and see all the different, but very similar species, its very obvious that they are the effects of evolution.

What seems obvious is not always so. We still have a flat-earth society today, for what seems "obvious" to that group of people. Science is based on observation, not on what seems obvious to you. That is pure relativism, part of the human manifesto taught in all the public schools today.
Adaptation is not evolution. The assumption that it took billions of years is just that: an assumption. Furthermore you have no starting point. How many "kinds" did God create in the first place. Can you define "kinds" in the way that God did? Since you don't know what God created how can you assume how many "kinds" of birds there are now compared to how many there were six to ten thousand years ago?

You tell me your reasoning behind this. Would you rather Intelligent Design be taught in schools? And if so, go ahead and burn the U.S. Constitution while you're at it please. Again, go watch Ken Miller's lecture on ID. He is a Christian biologist at Brown University, and I have much respect for the man.

I have respect for many scientists that are Christian, probably more than you have ever heard of. No, I wouldn't burn the U.S. Constitution. It has no bearing on this discussion and does not discuss Creation nor evolution. However it does, in its preamble, start out with the very assumption that God exists.
Secondly I couldn't do anything about it if I tried. I am a Canadian, not an American.
Respect for a man, doesn't make his views correct. It is possible (not likely) that you could have respect for either Hitler or Marx. But that wouldn't place any value on their ideology as being correct, as far as I am concerned. The Bible is my final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. To that I resort.

No, I have a plenty of well founded faith in my relationship with God. I know that I will be going to Heaven and I certainly don't need your approval to get there.

I am glad to hear that. Study to show yourself approved unto God. (and not approved unot men)...but rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

You on the other hand have the misplaced faith. Your faith is in a text written by human beings that claim to be inspired by God.

If you really believed that, then perhaps you are not saved, as you just said you are. If you question my salvation, then maybe you should examine yourself to see whether you are in the faith or not. That is a Biblical admonition.
You see I beleive an inspired book, revelation that came direct from God Himself.

2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
--It was God the Holy Spirit speaking through those holy authors that wrote down the words of God, the very revelation that He has for mankind.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
--God's Word is inspired; every word of it. It claims to be. Do you believe it or not. If you don't believe the promises that are written in the Bible, how can you believe the God that you say you have a relationship with. How would you know him if you can't trust the Book by which He is revealed to you?

 

[Amy.G]

Then please feel free not to add your opinion on evolution.

This is a debate forum. A Christian one at that. Please feel free not to add your secular opinions.

 

[Rew_10]

I believe in the basic messages in the Bible, its the details I have qualms with. DHK, you're using Biblical quotes to support the Bible. The Council of Nicaea, I feel sure, kept out any conflicting texts.

 

[DHK]

Amy, I'm not going to sit here and teach you evolution. .

And it's a good thing too. This is a debate forum, not a platform for you to teach anyone. Be sure your debate is within the realm of the rules that you agreed to when you registered with the board. Perhaps it would be a good idea for you to re-read them.

 

[Rew_10]

This is a debate forum. A Christian one at that. Please feel free not to add your secular opinions.

Amy, my post to you was based on the fact that you're trying to dispute evolution without educating yourself on it and even refusing to educate yourself on it. Did you discuss the Bible without reading it?

 

[Rew_10]

And it's a good thing too. This is a debate forum, not a platform for you to teach anyone. Be sure your debate is within the realm of the rules that you agreed to when you registered with the board. Perhaps it would be a good idea for you to re-read them.

It was a rhetorical statement, which is why I didn't proceed to do so.

 

[annsni]

You don't know me well enough to dismiss me, lady.

Sorry sweetie - but if you're not willing to read some good stuff yet argue issues that just may be answered in the other links, then I can't say any more.

Edit to add: I didn't see a website cited by Helen.

Actually, I said it's Helen's husband's site. I'm not sure if she's posted it here - I think I may have but I can't check now. It's http://www.setterfield.org/ I checked it out and it looks like there's a plethora of great stuff there. I've got to spend some time looking through it all but I trust what he says, from what I've read already. Check it out!

 

[Amy.G]

The comment on homosexuality wasn't meant to be part of the debate, but rather a reason why I felt that the Bible can't all be taken literally. And I also provided cited evidence for this, and will happily cite more.

Even with all the different "varieties" of Baptists on this board, and even with all of the different interpretations of scripture, there is one thing that all Baptists agree on and that is this: the Bible is the inerrant word of God. I have to wonder why you claim to be a Baptist in your profile, yet you do not believe in the Holy inspiration of scripture. ???