Creation vs. Evolution II

[Rosenritter]

What makes you think that Genesis days are 24-hour days? The Scriptures you quote blast apart your idea. First of all, the seventh day was not 24 hours long, but THOUSANDS OF YEARS long. We can see this from the N.T. where the writer of Hebrews speaks of God's rest-day.

"...I [God] became disgusted with this generation and said, 'They always go astray in their hearts, and they have not come to know my ways.' So I swore in my anger, 'They shall not enter into my rest.'" (Hebrews 3:10,11)

"Therefore, since a promise is left of entering into his rest, let us fear that someone of you may seem to have fallen short of it....For we who have faith DO enter into his rest....For in one place he has said of the seventh day as follows: 'And God rested on the seventh day from all his works,' and again in this place: 'They shall not enter into my rest.' Since, therefore, it remains for some to enter into it, and those to whom the good news was first declared did not enter in because of disobedience." (Hebrews 4:1-6; see the whole chapter)

Looking at Genesis 2:4, it is again as plain as day that "day" does not mean a literal 24 hours. It says that the heavens and earth were created, "in the day that God made them. You would say that He created them ALL in a 24-hour span of time? Must be, if you take "day" to mean 24 hours!


Clearly, God's "day of rest" continues. It will end after Christ's Millennial Reign, as any serious student of the Scriptures can undoubtedly see.

At Genesis 1:4,5 the word "day" refers to daylight hours in contrast with the nighttime, suggesting no particular amount of time. The record thereafter goes on to use the word "day" to refer to other units of time of varying length. In both the Hebrew and the Greek scriptures, the word "day" is used in both a literal AND a figurative sense, and should not be strictly assumed to be 24-hour days.

In addition, there is no indication (other than somebody's imagination) that the Hebrews used hours in dividing up the day prior to the Babylonian exile. Check this out: The word "hour" found at Daniel 3:6,15; 4:19,33; 5:5 in the KJV is translated from the Aramaic word sha'ah', which, literally, means "a look" and is more correctly translated "a moment."

The use of hours by the Jews, however, did come into regular practice following the exile.

Get your facts straight before you pontificate (oh I made a cool little saying!). To sum up....you ask how is the meaning of "day" determined? I think I have shown that, since we are STILL in God's rest day, that "day" is at least seven thousand years long. The "day" that God made the earth and the heavens is not a 24-hour period either, seeing as the heavens themselves have been around for billions of years. The Bible does not conflict with Science, as you have taken upon yourself to make it seem.

No matter how you slice it, the days of Creation consisted of one dark portion and one light portion.

Genesis 1:20-23 KJV
(20) And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
(21) And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
(22) And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
(23) And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

There isn't any room for you to argue that the Genesis days were not "24 hour days" in this scope, unless you want to argue that there was a million year evening and a million year morning, or a technicality that perhaps the 24 hours were more like 24 hours and 12 minutes, or something like that...

DAY is already defined for this context.

 

[6days]

You claim to be a scientist

I do?

who values the scientific method.

I do!

So use the scientific method, show me what evidence supports the scientific hypothesis that there is a supernatural being that created the entire universe.

The scientific method consists partly of observation...experiment...formulating hypotheses....repeating. Big Bang, or a Creating God are not directly observable, testable, repeatable, or falsifiable. We can however use the scientific method in the present, then interpret the data through our worldview. We could for example test if our universe is consistent with the Word of the One claiming He was there at the beginning. We could check if the universe appears orderly...Does it appear fine tuned? Can we form testable equations to describe predictable behaviors of the universe, based on the eye witness testimony? Are there predictions of things like decaying magnetic fields, based on the creation model proven true by science? Absolutely!
Science supports "In the beginning, God created..."

 

[Greg Jennings]

I do?
I do!

The scientific method consists partly of observation...experiment...formulating hypotheses....repeating. Big Bang, or a Creating God are not directly observable, testable, repeatable, or falsifiable. We can however use the scientific method in the present, then interpret the data through our worldview. We could for example test if our universe is consistent with the Word of the One claiming He was there at the beginning. We could check if the universe appears orderly...Does it appear fine tuned? Can we form testable equations to describe predictable behaviors of the universe, based on the eye witness testimony? Are there predictions of things like decaying magnetic fields, based on the creation model proven true by science? Absolutely!
Science supports "In the beginning, God created..."

Alright so to be clear, you admit that there is no scientific evidence that led you to the conclusion that the universe has God as its creator?

 

[MichaelCadry]

You claim to be a scientist who values the scientific method. So use the scientific method, show me what evidence supports the scientific hypothesis that there is a supernatural being that created the entire universe. You have made your conclusion that, so show me what scientific evidence led you to that conclusion

Dear Greg J,

So you want some evidence, eh? The Lord visited me and spoke to me. I was laid down to go to sleep when I felt a presence next to me, but I could see no one. I was 18 and found myself having a heart attack. My heart was beating out of my chest, and I was trembling and crying. It was horrifying until the Lord stepped in. First I thought to myself to call a doctor, but I figured there would not be enough time. Then I thought to call in my mother, but I figured what could she do. I then remembered and prayed to God. I said, "Dear Lord, let me live through all of this so that I can tell my family and friends about it." All of a sudden, a Booming voice spoke loud and commanding, coming from the ceiling on my front left side saying, "Calm yourself and think of those you love." He spoke to me two times more after that, but for now, I'll press onward.

Ten days later, I had my first angel visit. And he glowed like the stars, not like the sun, like florescent compared to regular light bulbs. And the whole room was filled with his voice saying, "Fear God, and give Him glory, for the hour of His judgment is come upon all of the Earth; and worship Him Who made the Heaven and Earth, and the seas, and the fountains of waters." I could not take my eyes away from watching the angel, and I had never seen one before and might never see one again, so I was transfixed. Suddenly, I thought to call my new girlfriend over and tell her about what happened.

I also asked my Mom if we could have a meeting with my best friend and his family that night and she said yes. So I called my best friend's Mom and told her about it. She left a note for my best friend to come over here and when he got home around 3:15 a.m., I met him in the driveway. Once he got there, I started telling everyone about the Lord visiting me ten days earlier and also the angel visit that I had. We were all very joyful all night talking and I went to sleep around 6:30 a.m. and some of my friends and sisters went out to get breakfast. I fell into the sweetest sleep that I have ever had. I knew that, even though Jesus did not return that night, I knew something was going on and it's been quite a roller coaster since then. I had two more angels visit me after that night, each coming exactly one week after the last one. The second two angels I did not see, but I heard their voices booming out in the living room. I will close for now. If you want to know more, go to my website at:
www.jesusreturningverysoon.com
Left-click on the words "Book Copy," and then left click on 'SKU-text2.pdf' You will notice the first two pages of the book are blank. That is for autographs and readers' notes. On the third page, you will find the Title Page of my book called, "What Your Eyes Have Not Seen." You can flip through the pages using your up and down arrow cursor keys. For some people, it will be their left and right arrow cursor keys. You can download it to your computer or to a printer, if you choose. I am the author, and you have my permission. You can also get an actual paperback at Barnes & Noble, or Amazon.com. They will have to order it for you, but it won't take long. It's also available in the downtown Phoenix Library. It's been there since 2003.

Okay, I'm done for now. Do you need more proof or more current proof. Does actual visits from the Lord and angels count as evidence in your life? I suggest you check it out so you can understand that most everything in Daniel and Revelation has already happened. All the really remains is for God to take home certain people and then BOOM!! You'll have this info though cause you'll need it in the future, to say the least. You will be glad that you knew me, because it will help you much to get by in the near future. Watch and Wait! It shouldn't be long now.

God Be With You,

Michael

 

[Greg Jennings]

Dear Greg J,

So you want some evidence, eh? The Lord visited me and spoke to me. I was laid down to go to sleep when I felt a presence next to me, but I could see no one. I was 18 and found myself having a heart attack. My heart was beating out of my chest, and I was trembling and crying. It was horrifying until the Lord stepped in. First I thought to myself to call a doctor, but I figured there would not be enough time. Then I thought to call in my mother, but I figured what could she do. I then remembered and prayed to God. I said, "Dear Lord, let me live through all of this so that I can tell my family and friends about it." All of a sudden, a Booming voice spoke loud and commanding, coming from the ceiling on my front left side saying, "Calm yourself and think of those you love." He spoke to me two times more after that, but for now, I'll press onward.

Ten days later, I had my first angel visit. And he glowed like the stars, not like the sun, like florescent compared to regular light bulbs. And the whole room was filled with his voice saying, "Fear God, and give Him glory, for the hour of His judgment is come upon all of the Earth; and worship Him Who made the Heaven and Earth, and the seas, and the fountains of waters." I could not take my eyes away from watching the angel, and I had never seen one before and might never see one again, so I was transfixed. Suddenly, I thought to call my new girlfriend over and tell her about what happened.

I also asked my Mom if we could have a meeting with my best friend and his family that night and she said yes. So I called my best friend's Mom and told her about it. She left a note for my best friend to come over here and when he got home around 3:15 a.m., I met him in the driveway. Once he got there, I started telling everyone about the Lord visiting me ten days earlier and also the angel visit that I had. We were all very joyful all night talking and I went to sleep around 6:30 a.m. and some of my friends and sisters went out to get breakfast. I fell into the sweetest sleep that I have ever had. I knew that, even though Jesus did not return that night, I knew something was going on and it's been quite a roller coaster since then. I had two more angels visit me after that night, each coming exactly one week after the last one. The second two angels I did not see, but I heard their voices booming out in the living room. I will close for now. If you want to know more, go to my website at:
www.jesusreturningverysoon.com
Left-click on the words "Book Copy," and then left click on 'SKU-text2.pdf' You will notice the first two pages of the book are blank. That is for autographs and readers' notes. On the third page, you will find the Title Page of my book called, "What Your Eyes Have Not Seen." You can flip through the pages using your up and down arrow cursor keys. For some people, it will be their left and right arrow cursor keys. You can download it to your computer or to a printer, if you choose. I am the author, and you have my permission. You can also get an actual paperback at Barnes & Noble, or Amazon.com. They will have to order it for you, but it won't take long. It's also available in the downtown Phoenix Library. It's been there since 2003.

Okay, I'm done for now. Do you need more proof or more current proof. Does actual visits from the Lord and angels count as evidence in your life? I suggest you check it out so you can understand that most everything in Daniel and Revelation has already happened. All the really remains is for God to take home certain people and then BOOM!! You'll have this info though cause you'll need it in the future, to say the least. You will be glad that you knew me, because it will help you much to get by in the near future. Watch and Wait! It shouldn't be long now.

God Be With You,

Michael

Michael, I am not saying that your story did not happen, but you don't have tangible evidence that you can use to show me that it absolutely happened either. If I could see an EKG of your heart during these times, then see the moment that God changed it on the EKG, then THAT would be tangible evidence.

That's the difference between what you and 6days believe (in terms of evolution) and what I believe: I follow the evidence to wherever that may lead. 6days starts with a supposition that, to him, is unquestionably true (despite lacking evidence) then he looks to find anything that will fit into his chosen supposition and disregards anything contrary

 

[Jose Fly]

Are you seriously putting forth that "genetic algorithms" (as you call it) are a useful technological product of evolutionary theory?

The only question here is whether you're actually dumb enough to think that was the point of what I posted, or if you're just being ridiculously dishonest. Given your previous history, I'd say the latter is most likely.

Here is what I posted...

Look, for normal people this is a fairly simple question to answer. 6days is claiming that "Common ancestry is an idea that has not contributed to a single new technology...nor a single advancement in medicine."

Ok, how would we potentially falsify that claim? The answer is obvious....we present an example of evolutionary common ancestry contributing to technology or medicine, and if we find either the claim will have been proved false.

Now, why evolutionary common ancestry would contribute to technology is kind of a weird thing to ponder. Other than genetic algorithms, which are models of biological evolution used to generate solutions to things like engineering problems, I'm not sure how biological evolution would really even apply to "technology".

So that leaves us with seeing if evolutionary common ancestry has contributed to medical science. And as I've posted many times, THIS PAPER is a clear example of exactly that...

Protein Molecular Function Prediction by Bayesian Phylogenomics

Abstract

We present a statistical graphical model to infer specific molecular function for unannotated protein sequences using homology. Based on phylogenomic principles, SIFTER (Statistical Inference of Function Through Evolutionary Relationships) accurately predicts molecular function for members of a protein family given a reconciled phylogeny and available function annotations, even when the data are sparse or noisy. Our method produced specific and consistent molecular function predictions across 100 Pfam families in comparison to the Gene Ontology annotation database, BLAST, GOtcha, and Orthostrapper. We performed a more detailed exploration of functional predictions on the adenosine-5′-monophosphate/adenosine deaminase family and the lactate/malate dehydrogenase family, in the former case comparing the predictions against a gold standard set of published functional characterizations. Given function annotations for 3% of the proteins in the deaminase family, SIFTER achieves 96% accuracy in predicting molecular function for experimentally characterized proteins as reported in the literature. The accuracy of SIFTER on this dataset is a significant improvement over other currently available methods such as BLAST (75%), GeneQuiz (64%), GOtcha (89%), and Orthostrapper (11%). We also experimentally characterized the adenosine deaminase from Plasmodium falciparum, confirming SIFTER's prediction. The results illustrate the predictive power of exploiting a statistical model of function evolution in phylogenomic problems. A software implementation of SIFTER is available from the authors.

So there we have it...they developed a statistical model based on evolutionary relationships between a wide variety of organisms and applied it to genetic data. And even when that data was "sparse or noisy", the model still correctly identified genetic function to a 96% degree of accuracy. Unless you want to be so absurd as to argue that genetic function isn't at all relevant to medical science, the only conclusion (for normal people) is that evolutionary common ancestry has clearly and directly contributed to medical science.

Thus the claim that "Common ancestry is an idea that has not contributed to a single new technology...nor a single advancement in medicine" is demonstrably false, and no amount of mindlessly repetitious "No it isn't....no it isn't....no it isn't..." changes that.

At least that's how it works in the normal world.​

Funny how you completely ignored the primary point (evolutionary common ancestry being the entire framework under which genetic function is discerned).

Well....not so much "funny" as fundamentally dishonest.

 

[Rosenritter]

Alright so to be clear, you admit that there is no scientific evidence that led you to the conclusion that the universe has God as its creator?

Do you have a computer? Do you have any scientific evidence that your computer was formed by a creator, rather than forming itself?

 

[Greg Jennings]

Do you have a computer? Do you have any scientific evidence that your computer was formed by a creator, rather than forming itself?

Yes. The box it came in, the label on it, the serial number, the fact that I can look up where the specific model was constructed, by who, and for how how much.

 

[Rosenritter]

As the series says, it flunks:

https://www.amazingfacts.org/media-library/book/e/33/t/how-evolution-flunked-the-science-test

Two days ago there was a presentation just on bees that is to biology what THE PRIVILEGED PLANET is to astrophysics. Undeniably designed and created in a moment.

Our evolutionists here will never read that.

 

[Rosenritter]

Good. I have a few more that are brilliant:

Intelligent Design 101, General editor H. Wayne House, 2008

The Devil's Delusion, David Berlinski, 2008

Darwin's Black Box, Michael J. Behe, 1996

Intelligent Design, William A. Dembski, 1999


There are many more, but if people would read even one of these they would get the impeccable reasoning associated with observations about the harmony of Science, Mathematics, and an intelligent Designer.

I'm in the middle of Black Box right now.

 

[Rosenritter]

The linked article is incompetent. For example, under the heading Chance Life—A Ridiculous Improbability, is has this comment:

"From the probability standpoint, the ordering of the present environment into a single amino acid molecule would be utterly improbable in all the time and space available for the origin of terrestrial life. "​

But this treats atoms as random building blocks, ignoring all the laws of chemistry that provide rules for atoms to self-organise. In fact, amino acids have been discovered on comets formed from simple molecules and powered by the occasional warmth of sunlight. Hardly improbable then!

The rest of the article is similarly naïve and credulous. You'll need something written by someone with a little knowledge of science to do the critique for it to be anything other than humorous.

You forgot that there are more powerful forces at work breaking down much faster than any that by chance might build up.

 

[Rosenritter]

Perhaps one of the YECs here could explain the existence near my home of high White Cliffs of chalk, fifteen hundred meters thick and substantially made from the microscopic and intact fossils of trillions of tiny creatures.

How could this have been formed with a Great Flood theory?

Perhaps you could explain the alleged proposed dilemma before I simply dismiss this as an inane stupid question?

 

[Rosenritter]

So a localised event (not remotely a global flood, of course) removed rock long after it had formed. How did a flood create the rock in the first place?

Have you taken 2 minutes to even read the account which you claim to criticize? There's three types of rock here that I'll point to. Igneous, sedimentary, and metamorphic. Which type are you questioning the creation of?

 

[Rosenritter]

How does this explain she 1500 m thickness of chalk came from? Being composed of the remains of small creatures, it would have taken millions of years to accumulate. How does your unverified quote help explain this?

What assumptions, pray tell, are you using to calculate that 1500 m thickness of chalk would take millions of years to accumulate?

By that measure, my driveway went through several hundred thousand years of accumulation a weekend ago.

 

[Rosenritter]

What sort of false readings would systematically give all the various independent methods the same great age? Be specific, please.

It's very easy when you come up with the answer you want before you do the calculations.

 

[Rosenritter]

Even if Adam and Eve and the Talking snake are real, original sin would still be a myth. Sure, Adam and Eve were the first to sin, but the reason why the whole of mankind die is because they know the difference between good and evil. Surely that is clear from the story. One could almost say that to be anything other than childlike is a sin, because anyone who knows the difference between good and evil should not be allowed to live for ever. Of course this is before Jesus comes in.

You're reading it wrong.

Mankind doesn't die because they know the difference between good and evil, nor does it say that. Read it carefully. Man chose between eternal life and the knowledge of good and evil. There's nothing wrong with man wanting to know good: Good would be life eternal. But man chose to know not just to know the good that was offered, but to know both good and evil. For that, mankind was cursed to die.

Our society and laws reflect the same concept. We are allowed certain freedoms, and there are good things provided for us. Some people, however, also choose that they want to determine for themselves what is "right" for them, and they also choose to have knowledge of evil. Our laws condemn these people to death. Those that choose knowledge of rape, murder, cannibalism, child molestation, and human trafficking are sentenced to death.

Perhaps if you double back and reread the account with that consideration it might make more sense as written?

 

[Rosenritter]

Actually there is overwhelming evidence. It's just that you reject evidence that contradicts your belief system.*

Haha... that is pretty naieve of you. *Christianity is a faith based on evidence. *We have evidence from things seen in history, literature, prophecy, archaeology science etc. We also have evidence of things unseen such as the omnipotence and omniscience of the Creator in the world around us.*

For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. Rom. 1:20

Christianity is based on observed empirical evidence.

Luke 24:39-40 KJV
(39) Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.
(40) And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.

1 Corinthians 15:17-18 KJV
(17) And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
(18) Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.

Matthew 27:52-53 KJV
(52) And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
(53) And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

You're arguing a little too late that the Romans were just too lazy to produce a body to squelch an uprising that could destroy their empire.

 

[Rosenritter]

Science is just one kind of truths. Not each and every kind of truths is a science. That's the point.

You don't even have the intelligence to comprehend what is said correctly.

GCThomas confuses time and distance (again?)

I've saw a star explode, as it happened, 100 million years ago. It grew brighter until it outshone it's host galaxy, then it faded away again. Direct observation of the past.

 

[Rosenritter]

Ughh......if you knew anything about the subject you desperately pretend to be an expert in, then you'd know that chalk forms from the accumulation of the tests of marine microorganisms in the benthic zone and sometimes deeper. It has nothing to do with erosion. The cliffs of chalk were lifted via tectonic processes, and THEN erosion ate away the outside to reveal the chalk deposit beneath

Still waiting for someone to explain why this would create an alleged problem for the flood.

 

[Rosenritter]

Yes. The box it came in, the label on it, the serial number, the fact that I can look up where the specific model was constructed, by who, and for how how much.

The label formed itself, silly. It's much more plausible than a powerful intelligent being forming it. You're just believing in a bunch of fairy tales formed by primitive tribesmen who say that the label came from the Creator.