Barbarian observes:
However, Genesis directly contradicts the "Ex nihilo" claims of young Earth creationism, because it says that the earth and waters brought forth living things.
This is another red herring.
Nope. It's God's Word. You should accept it, reagardless of you personal desires. God says that the earth brought forth living things. YE creationism says that God created them from nothing. You can pick God's word that they were brought forth from the earth, or man's doctrine that they were created from nothing. Up to you.
Evolutionism dies a horrible death in "SIX evenings and mornings".
Fortunately, it's still quite vigorous. In fact, every so often, we get another prominent creationist like Michael Denton to see the light and accept God's creation.
Every atheist evolutionist on the planet would admit that.
Atheists, like YE creationists, have an axe to grind. They want to make science incompatible with religion.
Obviously the Bible does not promote evolution or speak to it except to say "The fool has said in his heart - there is no God".
Barbarian observes:
You've confused atheism and science.
No you have confused evolutionism with science. They aren't the same thing.
Evolutionary theory, because it depends on evidence, is a science. Creationism, because it depends only on faith, is a religion.
Meaning that the fool must then account for all of life and nature "without God" as the explanation.
Science does not, and cannot account for the origin of nature itself. That is beyond the reach of science.
Sorry. Science can't do that for you. For that, you need other ways of knowing. Science can only tell you about the physical universe, not how it came about. It can neither deny nor confirm God. Scientists who believe in God cannot use science to support their beliefs. It is too weak a system for that.
IF there IS NO God - then ALL that the fool sees on earth -- he must account for by some "other means" than divine creation.
Science can only use scientific means. But scientists can be theists, and most of them are. Science does not require one believe there is no God.
But even worse for evolutionism - good science flatly contradicts the speculative myths of evolutionism.
THe vast majority of scientists disagree with you. You aren't a scientist, are you? Perhaps if you learned more about science, it would be useful for you.
We saw that with entropy. Even the evolutionists Isaac Asimov clearly admitted what science SEES (local INCREASEs in entropy) with what evolutionism "needs" -- (Massive DECREASES in local entropy).
I see massive decreases in local entropy every day. Sometimes I wish it wasn't so massive. I would certainly appreciated the grass being less vigorous about decreasing local entropy.
To establish your claim, you might consider answering UTEOTW's challenge above. Show what essential process of evoltution is ruled out by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Show your work.
We saw that again with the lack of mono-chiral results in all experiments used today to produce proteins for cell "building blocks".
In fact, we find that many of the naturally occuring amino acids in the Murchison meteorite have an excess of L-forms, just as abiogenesis predicted.
Learning about the specifics would definitely help you in these debates.
