Creation vs. Evolution

[alwight]

I wish it was so easy. The * appear only when using a mobile phone. I have had same problem with 2 different high end Samsungs.

Sorry 6days, on my previous response to this I didn't seem to read what you said very well, my bad.
So here's a picture of Asterix the Gaul.

 

[iouae]

What global flood? Peer reviewed scientific evidence, got any?

Peer reviewed scientific evidence is like asking all on this forum for consensus on some religious topic.

Instead I give you men of faith something much better. Your own eyes. Take a walk. Anywhere. Look at the sedimentary rocks. For instance I am surrounded by sandstone with smooth pebbles rolled smooth by wave action, with thousands of mollusc shells interspersed.

Seeing really is believing.

 

[Derf]

What global flood? Peer reviewed scientific evidence, got any?

How does one "review" scientific evidence? It's not like you can reject evidence. You can only reject the conclusions a scientist comes to based on the evidence. And until fairly recently (mid-1900s) catastrophism was "rejected" by a fairly large number of scientist, until it became apparent that something rather global killed the dinosaurs, and buried them in such a way that their fossils were preserved.

Maybe it wasn't a flood that killed the dinosaurs--maybe it was a comet/asteroid as many (not all, by any means) scientists assert in peer-reviewed journals. But what's the most likely result of such a large object hitting the earth, especially if it hits in the ocean? Global tsunamis, perhaps? (That's Japanese for a big wave!)

 

[Hedshaker]

Peer reviewed scientific evidence is like asking all on this forum for consensus on some religious topic.

Instead I give you men of faith something much better. Your own eyes. Take a walk. Anywhere. Look at the sedimentary rocks. For instance I am surrounded by sandstone with smooth pebbles rolled smooth by wave action, with thousands of mollusc shells interspersed.

Seeing really is believing.

Oh dear "Seeing really is believing." So let's ditch science and rely on faith and what we see instead. The sun still orbits the Earth. The Earth is still flat. Mental illness is still demon possession?

Is light a wave or a particle?

Good luck with your ancient superstition, mean will the rest of us move on....... :think:

 

[Hedshaker]

How does one "review" scientific evidence? It's not like you can reject evidence. You can only reject the conclusions a scientist comes to based on the evidence. And until fairly recently (mid-1900s) catastrophism was "rejected" by a fairly large number of scientist, until it became apparent that something rather global killed the dinosaurs, and buried them in such a way that their fossils were preserved.

Maybe it wasn't a flood that killed the dinosaurs--maybe it was a comet/asteroid as many (not all, by any means) scientists assert in peer-reviewed journals. But what's the most likely result of such a large object hitting the earth, especially if it hits in the ocean? Global tsunamis, perhaps? (That's Japanese for a big wave!)

So you don't have any then? You could have just said.

 

[gcthomas]

But what's the most likely result of such a large object hitting the earth, especially if it hits in the ocean? Global tsunamis, perhaps? (That's Japanese for a big wave!)

There is good evidence for exactly that, don't you know.

 

[6days]

I know what "without form and void" means.*
As you say, it means just that, which is how the earth became after a mass extinction.

The only mass extinction in scripture
(Other than prophetic) is Noah's flood and is not referred to as formless and void.

God created the earth as formless... it was a water world without mountains... without continents. ...without trees.....without life. This water world was the first step in a six days process of forming and filling the earth.

Is 45:18*says...
18 For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it,*he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.

Here the word for "vain" is Strongs H8414, same word for "without form" in*Gen 1:2.

So putting the two together, God did not create the earth "tohu".
Thus it must have become this way.

Because you want to add billions of years into God's Word, you add unscriptural ideas into the text.

Iouae... you seem to have a low view of God and a low view of scripture. ... very similar to the heretical teachings of Biologos.

 

[Greg Jennings]

There is good evidence for exactly that, don't you know.

This comment you responded to gcthomas kind of took me aback. It's well known to anyone who has done even the slightest bit of research on the subject that there is abundant evidence for global tsunamis over one mile high, and that this is thought to be a result of an asteroid impact in the Gulf of Mexico about 65 million years ago.

Derf here, like many creationists, seems completely oblivious of this. I'm always left wondering why people that are so disinterested in the truth that they can't even google something act like they are the authority on science. Utterly baffling

 

[Greg Jennings]

How does one "review" scientific evidence? It's not like you can reject evidence. You can only reject the conclusions a scientist comes to based on the evidence. And until fairly recently (mid-1900s) catastrophism was "rejected" by a fairly large number of scientist, until it became apparent that something rather global killed the dinosaurs, and buried them in such a way that their fossils were preserved.

Maybe it wasn't a flood that killed the dinosaurs--maybe it was a comet/asteroid as many (not all, by any means) scientists assert in peer-reviewed journals. But what's the most likely result of such a large object hitting the earth, especially if it hits in the ocean? Global tsunamis, perhaps? (That's Japanese for a big wave!)

It's been the opinion of most of the scientific community for a couple decades now that the dinosaurs' extinction was a result of several factors resulting from the asteroid impact. The impact caused the sun to be blocked out by dust in the atmosphere, causing rapidly falling global temperatures and the death of a large amount of plant life. What happens when plants die? That's right, the dinosaurs that ate those plants die. And then the dinosaurs that ate those plant-eating dinos died.

It wasn't simply the impact that wiped them out completely

 

[iouae]

The only mass extinction in scripture
(Other than prophetic) is Noah's flood and is not referred to as formless and void.

God created the earth as formless... it was a water world without mountains... without continents. ...without trees.....without life. This water world was the first step in a six days process of forming and filling the earth.


Because you want to add billions of years into God's Word, you add unscriptural ideas into the text.

Iouae... you seem to have a low view of God and a low view of scripture. ... very similar to the heretical teachings of Biologos.

No, I know a bit about science. It's super easy to see the universe is older than 6000 years.

With the naked eye, one can see stars between 1500 and 8000 light years away.
With a telescope we see light which has taken tens of thousands of light years to get here.
The stronger the telescope, the further we see, and the older the stars in the sky.

Thus, to say the universe is only 6000 years old just makes us believers sound so igorant.

Same story with the fossil record. It CLEARLY shows strata containing human fossils, and deeper layers with no human fossils.

And we believers don't have to fight science. We have to fight our ignorance as to what the Bible really is saying in Genesis, viz. that this is only a regeneration 6000 years ago, not the original Big Bang/creation.

 

[MichaelCadry]

I am sure this has been covered before in this thread, but I believe the universe was created 13.75 billion years ago, stars exploded, elements heavier than Fe were formed from stardust.

Stardust gathered into earth 5 billion years ago. Earth underwent many mass extinctions, till we come to the second-last one over 6000 years ago, which left earth "without form and void". There were leftover beasties from millions of years back like crocodiles who could survive the darkness and wet conditions.

Then in 6 days God replenished the earth. Each time God replenishes the earth after a mass extinction, there is a completely new set of organisms from the ones before. This is why I don't believe in evolution - only multiple replenishings by God.

Then 1600 years later came the last mass-extinction called "the flood".

And before God created Adam He had experimented with Neanderthals, and Homo erectus, and Homo heidelbergensis etc. till he had a hominid sociable enough to barter and love and give.

That's my theory of everything, and it fits with science, and my views on religion.

Dear iouae,

You could very well be right about what you believe. I used to believe similar to that, but I changed my mind. It does tend to answer a lot of questions though. Thanks so much for your view on things. I will ponder it all. I used to believe there were Adams before our Adam. So I'm not totally new to the ideas you have. C'est la vie, eh?

God Be With You Always!!

Michael

:angel: :angel: :angel: :cloud9: :cloud9: :rapture:
​

 

[MichaelCadry]

It may fit with your particular view of religion but your understanding of science is flawed.

Dear Jonahdog,

I think your understanding of science is flawed too. Also, you're wrong about religion. So why should I entertain your beliefs??

Michael

 

[patrick jane]

Dear iouae,

You could very well be right about what you believe. I used to believe similar to that, but I changed my mind. It does tend to answer a lot of questions though. Thanks so much for your view on things. I will ponder it all. I used to believe there were Adams before our Adam. So I'm not totally new to the ideas you have. C'est la vie, eh?

God Be With You Always!!

Michael

:angel: :angel: :angel: :cloud9: :cloud9: :rapture:
​

Ephesians 4:14 KJV - James 1:6-8 KJV -


Colossians 1:16 KJV -

 

[Greg Jennings]

Dear Jonahdog,

I think your understanding of science is flawed too. Also, you're wrong about religion. So why should I entertain your beliefs??

Michael

Well Michael, if you'd like him to entertain your beliefs then it helps to entertain his in kind

 

[MichaelCadry]

OK. .. well we can do one field of science at a time but let's start with......
ARCHAEOLOGY / HISTORY (confirms accuracy)
Luke (Gospel of Luke) was perhaps the world's greatest historian. The research Luke did is reflected in the accuracy of his account. The Gospel of Luke is just one of many historically accurate Books in God's Word.

The Gospel of Luke besides numerous mentions of things with historical and archaeological significance also mentions;*
32 countries*
54 cities*
9 islands.*

Because of the numerous mention to countries and cities, Sir William Ramsay thought that this book would be the easiest one to disprove. He along with his archaeological team set out to Asia Minor to prove the Bible wrong. But... a funny thing happened. "Ramsay became so overwhelmed with the evidence he eventually converted to Christianity"*

Ramsey said*"I began with a mind unfavorable to it...but more recently I found myself brought into contact with the Book of Acts as an authority for the topography, antiquities, and society of Asia Minor. It was gradually borne upon me that in various details the narrative showed marvelous truth"

Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians."
http://www.bibleevidences.com/archeology.htm

Interesting how so many people say the Bible is filled with errors. Yet for many who are willing to study it with an open mind, such as Sir William Ramsay, Scripture is inerrant.*
.....................................................................

Archaeologist Clifford Wilson
"There have been plenty of claims that things contradict the biblical account, but the Bible has a habit of being proved right after all. I well remember one of the world’s leading archaeologists at Gezer rebuking a younger archaeologist who was ‘rubbishing’ the Bible. He just quietly said, ‘Well, if I were you, I wouldn’t rubbish the Bible.’ When the younger archaeologist asked ‘Why’?, he replied, ‘Well, it just has a habit of proving to be right after all.’ And that’s where I stand.

Professor Nelson Glueck, who I suppose would be recognized as one of the top five of the ‘greats’ in biblical archaeology, gave a marvellous lecture to 120 American students who were interacting with the Arabs. He said, ‘I have excavated for 30 years with a Bible in one hand and a trowel in the other, and in matters of historical perspective, I have never yet found the Bible to be in error’.

Professor G. Ernest Wright, Professor of Old Testament and Semitic Studies at Harvard University, gave a lecture at that same dig. He made the point that (because of the researches associated with the Hittites and the findings of Professor George Mendenhall concerning what are called the Suzerainty Covenant Treaties between the Hittite kings and their vassals) it had become clear that the records of Moses, when dealing with covenants, must be dated back to the middle of the second millennium*BC. That’s about 1500*BC. Also, that those writings should be recognized as a unity. In other words, they go back to one man. That one man could only be Moses.

I went to Professor Wright later and said, ‘Sir, this is very different from what you’ve been putting out in your own writings.’ He looked at me and said, ‘Clifford, for 30 years I’ve been teaching students coming to Harvard to train for the Christian ministry; I’ve been telling them they could forget Moses in the Pentateuch, but at least in these significant areas of the covenant documents that are there in the Pentateuch, I’ve had to admit that I was wrong.’

They were two scholastic giants. One says, ‘I’ve excavated for 30 years and I’ve never found the Bible to be in error’—basically that’s what he was saying. The other says, ‘For 30 years I’ve been wrong.’ It’s rather sad, isn’t it, that a good man such as Professor Wright had been so swept along with the ridiculous documentary hypothesis* that he had taken a wrong stand for so long. Let me stress that Professor Wright was a man of the highest integrity."

Dear 6days,

You are very learned, because you make a point of it. I'm very proud of you!! I lean on your beliefs for that reason and other reasons. You are going to find naysayers or angry mobs everywhere, but the only ones you have to prove is that there is a God. Belief in God's Son, Jesus, is also a requirement to get to Heaven when you die, so all of your naysayers better get their beliefs together. Thanks again for a wonderful job!!

May God Always Give To You In Abundance,

Michael

:cloud9: :angel: :angel: :angel: :cloud9: :rapture:

 

[patrick jane]

I just love the numbers of this thread - Best Thread Ever !!!


While I was an Auto Parts guy for 25 years I really loved numbers. Memorizing them, typing them on 10 key, looking up numbers and basic math. This thread has 915 pages and I think it has the most views. I crunched some numbers a few months ago and predicted when there would be a half million views; I forgot now but it's in this thread somewhere. Good job Michael for the upkeep and the "wide" variety.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Well Michael, if you'd like him to entertain your beliefs then it helps to entertain his in kind

Dear Greg Jennings,

I read his accounts, but I throw them out right after I read them. I'm not going to entertain false ideas. He's never going to entertain my ideas either. I've learned that. Let him prove me wrong and I will entertain his ideas.

Michael

:cloud9: :cloud9: :angel: :angel: :guitar: :singer:
​

 

[iouae]

Dear iouae,

You could very well be right about what you believe. I used to believe similar to that, but I changed my mind. It does tend to answer a lot of questions though. Thanks so much for your view on things. I will ponder it all. I used to believe there were Adams before our Adam. So I'm not totally new to the ideas you have. C'est la vie, eh?

God Be With You Always!!

Michael

:angel: :angel: :angel: :cloud9: :cloud9: :rapture:
​

Thanks for the encouraging words, which helps to keep this thread going.

 

[MichaelCadry]

No, I know a bit about science. It's super easy to see the universe is older than 6000 years.

With the naked eye, one can see stars between 1500 and 8000 light years away.
With a telescope we see light which has taken tens of thousands of light years to get here.
The stronger the telescope, the further we see, and the older the stars in the sky.

Thus, to say the universe is only 6000 years old just makes us believers sound so igorant.

Same story with the fossil record. It CLEARLY shows strata containing human fossils, and deeper layers with no human fossils.

And we believers don't have to fight science. We have to fight our ignorance as to what the Bible really is saying in Genesis, viz. that this is only a regeneration 6000 years ago, not the original Big Bang/creation.

Dear iouae,

Whoa! I still believe that God created Adam and Eve roughly 6,000 some years ago. I think He did create them aged, just as He created the animals aged, and the Earth and Universe aged. God created the chicken, male and female, before He created the egg. I don't want you to get the wrong idea, iouae. I have been there. God is quite capable of staying one step ahead of us and our telescopes. Just don't go wild on me. I believe God created us "in HIS image." That doesn't mean an ancient man of our past, but instead the way Adam and Eve looked and Jesus looked. Jesus said, "He who hath seen Me hath seen the Father." Think about that for awhile. You see, there is more to consider, iouae. That is why I believe the way I do now. So take it from the Bible, you must be careful what you think.

God Be With Your Deductions Always,

Michael

 

[Greg Jennings]

Dear iouae,

Jesus said, "He who hath seen Me hath seen the Father." Think about that for awhile.l

That means that whoever has seen him has also seen God because Jesus is supposed to be God.