On Evolution...

[KeyserSoze]

Noah, a direct descendant of Adam, who was made with an intelligence like God's, Genesis 3:22 arrived here inside Adam's small, miles wide firmament/Biosphere/which God called Heaven. Genesis 1:8 Noah's grandsons married and produced children with the sons of God (prehistoric people) Genesis 6:4 who had been on Earth for millions of years before the Ark arrived some 11k years ago, in man's time. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE Historic evidence is that farming, city building, smelting, etc first began on planet Earth from this area.

I'm by no means an expert in regards to this particular interpretation of scripture, but doesn't this scenario have something in common with the JWs interpretation of the text..?

 

[Yeshua1]

According to what resources..?

God will preserve the earth until he redoes new heavens and new earth, correct?

 

[BenWest]

I'm by no means an expert in regards to this particular interpretation of scripture, but doesn't this scenario have something in common with the JWs interpretation of the text..?

Now, you try to insult me by calling me a JW. When do you think you will get around trying to refute my view scientifically, historically, or in any other way? I'm the youngest of the Young Earthers since I show that the first Day of Creation was only 6 Days ago.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

When I was a HS soph, long before salvation, my biology teacher, who was a devout Christian, held up our textbook on the 1st day of class & said, "This book says, among other things, that birds evolved from lizards. Now, that's asking a lot from a lizard-to replace its perfectly-functional scales with feathers, to reverse the bend of its limbs,(Note that a lizard's limbs bend the same direction as ours.) trade its jaws & teeth for a beak, & toughest of all, change its chemistry from cold-blooded to warm-blooded. There are no 'missing links' half-n-half on any of those things."

That little lecture has stuck with me ever since. Years later, knowing evolution is impossible, I wrote to the astronomer Carl Sagan, whom I admired, & who was a staunch evolutionist, explaining those facts to him. He never wrote me back. Hard to believe such a brilliant mind was closed to simple, basic FACTS. (Oh well; I had to program my PH.D neighbor's Tivo for him.)

Any evolutionists who read this: Please don't be as close-minded as Dr. Sagan was. Please ask yourselves how an animal (or plant) coulda "evolved" from such different "ancestors".

BTW, the Eohippus, the "dawn horse", was about the size of a Collie, with a toe on each side of each hoof reaching the ground, while the modern horse has only vestigial toes fused to the leg bones. But, if eohippus was around today, it could mate with a modern horse, if physically possible, & produce offspring. They're the same basic species they didn't "evolve' into modern horses.

What your textbook said sounds reasonable compared to the evidential nonsense atheistic evolutionists presented to me over the years starting in middle school and never stopping. Anyone imagining it didn’t develop as a man-made religion (akin to Tower of Babel) which still has many adherents has missed a lot of history.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Yet another adhominem logical fallacy post

Sorry Rev, but this is not simple ad hominem . It has a basis in fact.
If you look up ICRs tax status, you'll find it listed as a religious "ministry". NOT as a science organization.
Also, If you go to creationist websites, you will clearly see that most have a "statement of faith" page that everyone who works there must sign.
These statements make it clear that these ministries will NOT accept any evidence that contradicts their biblical interpretations. That's not science.. Science REQUIRES them to follow the evidence where it leads, regardless of their beliefs.
What sites like ICR and AnswersinGenesis, etc do is start with the idea that THEIR interpretation of scripture HAS to be correct, and then attempt to "mold" or misrepresent any evidence that proves them wrong.. That's NOT science.. That's developing their pre conceived conclusion in advance in spite of evidence to the contrary.
Here, this is AiGs statement of faith.
<quote>
"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

Now, how blatant is that..? They are coming right out and admitting to you that they will NOT accept ANY evidence as valid (even if its "apparent") if it contradicts their own religious interpretations. That's NOT science.. That's outright fraud.

Now look at ICR..
<quote>
"All things in the universe were created and made by god in the six literal days of the creation week described in Genesis 1-1 2:3, and confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual, historical, and perspicuous; thus all theories of origins or development which involve evolution in any form are false."

Here, they are coming right out and telling you quite clearly "ALL theories which involve evolution are false"
They've already made up their mind that evolution is false.. It HAS to be false.. Their stated position is evidence be damned.. if it involves evolution, IT MUST BE FALSE"..

When an organization is telling you up front that no matter what evidence you show them, its not going to matter..?
Then they are making a mockery of the scientific endeavor..

 

[KeyserSoze]

Now, you try to insult me by calling me a JW. When do you think you will get around trying to refute my view scientifically, historically, or in any other way? I'm the youngest of the Young Earthers since I show that the first Day of Creation was only 6 Days ago.

No insult intended.. I thought i once heard a JW on one of my other message boards make similar claims..
It may have been simple coincidence.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Option 3, evolutionists in order to hold unto their manmade fable that discredits God, have to accept their "conclusions" despite obvious faults in them!

Since we have already established that religious higher education facilities also accept the old earth tests of modern geology, your claim that this is some form of conspiracy to "discredit god" is not grounded in reality.

 

[KeyserSoze]

God will preserve the earth until he redoes new heavens and new earth, correct?

I see. So you are using biblical text to refute the laws of physics.? Interesting.
So let me see if i understand your logic correctly..?
Since the Bible says "god will preserve the earth" that means that we humans can dump anything we want onto this planet and god will make sure there are no consequences for our actions..?
Then why have humans destroyed entire species ecosystems with pollutants and pesticides..?
Shouldn't God have stepped in and "preserved the earth" then too..?

 

[Revmitchell]

Sorry Rev, but this is not simple ad hominem . It has a basis in fact.
If you look up ICRs tax status, you'll find it listed as a religious "ministry". NOT as a science organization.
Also, If you go to creationist websites, you will clearly see that most have a "statement of faith" page that everyone who works there must sign.
These statements make it clear that these ministries will NOT accept any evidence that contradicts their biblical interpretations. That's not science.. Science REQUIRES them to follow the evidence where it leads, regardless of their beliefs.
What sites like ICR and AnswersinGenesis, etc do is start with the idea that THEIR interpretation of scripture HAS to be correct, and then attempt to "mold" or misrepresent any evidence that proves them wrong.. That's NOT science.. That's developing their pre conceived conclusion in advance in spite of evidence to the contrary.
Here, this is AiGs statement of faith.
<quote>
"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

Now, how blatant is that..? They are coming right out and admitting to you that they will NOT accept ANY evidence as valid (even if its "apparent") if it contradicts their own religious interpretations. That's NOT science.. That's outright fraud.

Now look at ICR..
<quote>
"All things in the universe were created and made by god in the six literal days of the creation week described in Genesis 1-1 2:3, and confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual, historical, and perspicuous; thus all theories of origins or development which involve evolution in any form are false."

Here, they are coming right out and telling you quite clearly "ALL theories which involve evolution are false"
They've already made up their mind that evolution is false.. It HAS to be false.. Their stated position is evidence be damned.. if it involves evolution, IT MUST BE FALSE"..

When an organization is telling you up front that no matter what evidence you show them, its not going to matter..?
Then they are making a mockery of the scientific endeavor..

You need to learn what an adhominem is. Further it is a logical fallacy to criticize the source without addressing what the source says as if the criticism is proof that what is said is wrong. It doesnt work that way. You have offered no proof of any error.

 

[Yeshua1]

Since we have already established that religious higher education facilities also accept the old earth tests of modern geology, your claim that this is some form of conspiracy to "discredit god" is not grounded in reality.

The religious groups that accept that are Theistic Evolutionists, who make science their sacred cow, and deny scripture in inspired and infallible!

 

[Yeshua1]

Sorry Rev, but this is not simple ad hominem . It has a basis in fact.
If you look up ICRs tax status, you'll find it listed as a religious "ministry". NOT as a science organization.
Also, If you go to creationist websites, you will clearly see that most have a "statement of faith" page that everyone who works there must sign.
These statements make it clear that these ministries will NOT accept any evidence that contradicts their biblical interpretations. That's not science.. Science REQUIRES them to follow the evidence where it leads, regardless of their beliefs.
What sites like ICR and AnswersinGenesis, etc do is start with the idea that THEIR interpretation of scripture HAS to be correct, and then attempt to "mold" or misrepresent any evidence that proves them wrong.. That's NOT science.. That's developing their pre conceived conclusion in advance in spite of evidence to the contrary.
Here, this is AiGs statement of faith.
<quote>
"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

Now, how blatant is that..? They are coming right out and admitting to you that they will NOT accept ANY evidence as valid (even if its "apparent") if it contradicts their own religious interpretations. That's NOT science.. That's outright fraud.

Now look at ICR..
<quote>
"All things in the universe were created and made by god in the six literal days of the creation week described in Genesis 1-1 2:3, and confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual, historical, and perspicuous; thus all theories of origins or development which involve evolution in any form are false."

Here, they are coming right out and telling you quite clearly "ALL theories which involve evolution are false"
They've already made up their mind that evolution is false.. It HAS to be false.. Their stated position is evidence be damned.. if it involves evolution, IT MUST BE FALSE"..

When an organization is telling you up front that no matter what evidence you show them, its not going to matter..?
Then they are making a mockery of the scientific endeavor..

Are the scriptures inspired and infallible?

 

[BenWest]

Are the scriptures inspired and infallible?

Yes, IF you have the proper interpretation. God's Truth MUST agree with every other discovered Truth or your interpretation is wrong. That is because God the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, is the Author.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes, IF you have the proper interpretation. God's Truth MUST agree with every other discovered Truth or your interpretation is wrong. That is because God the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, is the Author.

Those not agreeing with it being inspired and infallible will bring in Myth, accommodation to culture of the days, comparing OT to the ancient history texts, basically any way to make sure evolution gets seen as "true"

 

[MartyF]

I hate to break this to you Roby, but an enormous amount of evidence to confirm evolution has been discovered since you were a Sophmore in HS.
The fact of the matter Is that the reality of evolution is not in dispute anywhere science is conducted. Every science journal, every science organization, every university that educates PhD students in all the various fields of earth and life science ALL accept the validity of evolution.
The conducting of DNA testing has confirmed our evolutionary history and our related status with all the other apes on this planet.
Your denial of evolution is not grounded in reality in light of the mountain of evidence which confirms it in the 21st century.

There is no scientific evidence for the evolution of a primate into a human.

Zero. Zip. Nada.

 

[MartyF]

Well the thing about science is that it doesn't care what the average person "believes". It only cares about what the evidence actually demonstrates.

You have no clue what science is.

This is the scientific test for evolution.

1. Take primate.

2. Make Human.

Have you done that?

No?

Then you haven't proven anything other than you're another snake oil salesman.

 

[MartyF]

I see that you haven't looked at the data for global warming either.. So sad..
You might try visiting NASA's website as well as NOAAs to get the latest data on climate change..
You'll find that just like with evolution, the data is overwhelming in its favor.

Your prophet Obama disagrees with you.

 

[MartyF]

Statement of Wichcraft
Wichcraft, a foundational principle of modern biology, is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence and is accepted by the vast majority of scientists. Because it is fundamental to the understanding of modern biology, the faculty in the Biology Department at Baylor University (Waco, TX) teach witchcraft throughout the biology curriculum. We are in accordance with the American Association for Advancement of Science’s statement on witchcraft. We are a stupid department, so we teach alternative hypotheses or philosophically deduced theories and not anything which can be tested rigorously.

 

[BenWest]

Those not agreeing with it being inspired and infallible will bring in Myth, accommodation to culture of the days, comparing OT to the ancient history texts, basically any way to make sure evolution gets seen as "true"

Godless people changed descent with modification, into the term "evolution" and then added other godless theories, in order to eliminate God from His own Creation. God set a trap to catch them though, and today they are ensnared in God's SNARE, which He set with the flood. In their hast to declare their rejection of God's Truth, they forgot about the flood. 2 Peter 3;3-7 Without the flood, the people of planet Earth would still be living in caves and chasing our food around. That's God's Truth

 

[BenWest]

There is no scientific evidence for the evolution of a primate into a human.

Zero. Zip. Nada.

Then it should be easy for you to explain HOW the DNA of Mitochondrial Eve got inside EVERY Human on planet Earth today. She looked like an Ape and had descended from an Ape and was more like a primate than a Human. God explains in Genesis 6:4 and shows that the sons of God (prehistoric people) could and did produce children with Adam's descendants.

 

[BenWest]

This is the scientific test for evolution.

1. Take primate.

2. Make Human.

Have you done that?

1. The sons of God (prehistoric people) who descended from the last universal common ancestor
2. Humans are the descendants of Adam

God told us all about it in Genesis 6:4. No magical evolution required. Only the ability to marry and produce children with Adam's superior intelligence, which is like God's, Genesis 3:22 with people who descended from Apes. That's God's irrefutable Truth Scripturally, scientifically, historically, genetically and mathematically.