:nono:
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
:nono:
Dear Michael,
I don’t see any benefit in contesting your personal evaluation of the recent exchange I have had with 6days. Your comments are pretty much in line with what you consistently say about the on-going conversations.
If 6days concurs with you, and feels that my recent responses have been poorly done, then it would probably be to his benefit to simply let this recent exchange stand as it is. I am perfectly willing to let what I have said stand on its own merits. I have several other issues with what 6 days has said that I could bring forward, but I have elected to concentrate on what I felt were the more important points on which we differ. For now, I consider the ball to be in 6day’s court, and if he chooses to not respond, fine. I will probably keep monitoring this thread, and may interject comments that I feel are appropriate.
iouae
Well-known member
Nice similarities in comparing the accounts
Your timing is out a bit though, since Genesis has each stage occurring in literal days
Dear DavisBJ,
I'm not saying God can do stupid things that are highly improbable. You're just writing some absurd thing that you came up with to counter the truth I speak of. I don't use God like a band-aid. Very seldom, I say God can do it or God did do it. When it's appropriate and when truth is needed. My God looks like a man, like Jesus. Jesus said, "He who hath seen Me, hath seen the Father." God said, "Let us make man in Our image." My God doesn't need to eat, drink or have sex. He is, most of the time, in Spirit form. There is no need for Him to take the body of a man for any reason except RARE circumstances. Like when the Lord visited with two angels to see Lot before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. And no, He is hardly a stick figure. What is wrong with you. You come up with the most stupid stuff and call my words inferior?? HaHa!! Once this war with the devil, Satan, is ended {a couple thousand years from now}, then we shall be in bodily form, I believe, and we shall abide in the New Jerusalem. Marvelous mansions that the Lord has prepared for us. Beyond words to describe. I can't wait. You don't care. So that's a moot point. I'm extremely sorry for you, but you don't want to ride on the Peace Train. You don't want to go to Heaven. You'd rather believe it's not there, so there is your downfall. You'd be much smarter to believe, and if there is Heaven, you will go there, but if you'd rather remain a disbeliever, then you are screwed. You are just a real mess and you don't even know it. I'm not trying to be unkind, but pleasant words don't help you. So whatever. You do what you think you'd want your future to be. Living in Paradise, or in Hell, which is in the center of our Earth. Our Earth has a top and a center, but no bottom, because people on the bottom think they are on top, and they are at times, to be honest, because of gravity. So that means the Earth is a bottomless pit, having a top and center, but no bottom {bottom-LESS}. In the center of the Earth it is VERY HOT, with all of the lava and magma. That is where Satan is going to go shortly. But, after the second resurrection, Death and Hell will be cast into the Lake of Fire, which IS our SUN!! It is much hotter there, to be honest. And do you know a lightning bolt is something like ten times hotter than the sun? So some of those who are in Hell will be judged and possibly will go to Heaven and not to the Lake of Fire, because their sins are nothing compared to what man does now. I was told this about Hell and the lake of fire being our Sun, and if you don't want to believe me, fine. It's no sunburn off my back. I'll be happily in Heaven, in a glorious place to live and many mansions to visit. Flying, not walking. No legs needed. A spirit and soul does not die. God made them that way. He made Spirit to never die and also souls to never die, so they have to go somewhere sooner or later. They live forever, those in Heaven and those in Hell or the Lake of Fire, and they don't die. They exist is Hell or they have a blast in Heaven. That's the truth of it all, Davis, and you should rethink your position in the Book of Life. I can't convince you, so I will just give up.
Much Love Regardless!! Sure would be nice to see you up there in Heaven, with all of your friends and family possibly, depending on which paths they've chosen. That is why those of us who think we are going to Heaven, we try to talk those who don't believe in God to change their minds somehow so that they can be together in Heaven, instead of having a close friend be stuck in Hell and you can't speak to them anymore and they just stick down there, having wet dreams, thinking about all kinds of bad accusations about those in Heaven, etc. Good luck, Davis. Try thinking for one minute that you are on the wrong path instead. Give it some THOUGHT!!!
May You Truly Reconsider Heaven As Your Home, Instead Of Hell,
Michael
:rapture: :angel: :cloud9:
Dear DavisBJ,
Well now. You've written a very adult post. I'm glad that you could contain yourself. Now this is the DavisBJ that I used to know. No bad words from you to me. No bad words from me to you! This is just WONDERFUL!! Thank you, Davie!!
To A More Mature Dude!! Much Love And God Be With You Regardless Of Yourself,
Michael
Dear patrickj,
See Rev. 16:21KJV. There you will find out more about this hail that will come. It will be rough. The only way to escape it is to get into a good cave. PJ, I was just showing you where to start typing if you want to reply to me. It is after all the codes that you can type and reply. Some people don't know how to reply back to me without messing up their post. I'm going to try to find a nice font for you today and a good color!! Remember that you are loved. I pray for you and everyone at Tol every night on my knees. Hope you like this font. It is different!! Thanks for being you!!
May God Always Watch Over You And His Love For You To Be Strong!!
Michael
:guitar: :singer: :cloud9: :angel: :angel: :cloud9:
Dear Michael,
It's been too long my old friend....
I most certainly don't contend to be a good interpreter of scripture. That is your domain, so if you have to correct me, pls do.
In this recent post, I've included some of the more (IMO rediculous) bible quotes, including one that attests to the imminent yet strangly elusive end of the world.
It would appear that you also believe the End is nigh! Let me guess, during you lifetime, perhaps.....
Anyway, the tent might have some volume, but it's being spread over the "circle of the earth" "to dwell in" which sounds very flat indeed.
Cheers.
Thank you, Michael. I always appreciates a compliment from someone who has long been an understudy to the Gods.
Derf
Well-known member
Nice similarities in comparing the accounts
Your timing is out a bit though, since Genesis has each stage occurring in literal days
Not those stages I quoted. Those are all on the first day in both accounts at least until the beginning of the photon epoch, which started on the first day. And light continued to be available, though separate from the darkness in the Genesis account, prior to the Sun's introduction, which fits the Genesis account. I'm pretty confident we don't have enough info from the bible to give the kind of details scientists have proposed for the big bang timeline, but the idea of a beginning, of inflation, of photons prior to sustained matter, and of the timing for those first few stages could all be considered in-line with each other.
The timing beyond that is the main disconnect. We have 4 choices in how that plays out, assuming the other things are correct in both accounts.
- Both accounts are false
- BB is true, Genesis is false
- BB is false, Genesis is true
- Both accounts are true
The first is unhelpful, since we are debating between 2 potential truths and we don't really have a good alternative at this point.
The second is the anti-biblical view.
The third is the anti-scientific view.
The fourth is what I consider the most likely, with the above caveat about idealism. But how can both be true? The best science we have so far that deals with time inconsistencies is relativity theory, which says (with significant experimental proof) time in one place and under one set of conditions may flow faster or slower than time in another.
Are these two accounts reconcilable? Possibly. Should we try? As Christians I don't see why not to. Atheists probably wouldn't want to, as it lends credence to the biblical account. It's not necessarily a problem for scientists to continue to refine theories until they get everything right (after another 13 billion years, perhaps
), at which point maybe we'll be understanding the biblical account better, too--as Christians we always want to be doing that.Note that what I'm talking about is the "evolution" or "creation" of the cosmos, not of living things. That's a different subject, with different premises and different conclusions, perhaps.
:shocked:
Dear TheDuke,
I should have mentioned that you should read Rev. 16:21KJV; "And there fell upon men a a great hail out of heaven, every stone about the weight of a talent: and men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail; for the plague thereof was exceeding great." Talk about damaging your car!! Well, I just wanted to mention this scripture so you'd understand things better. Thanks for listening to me.
Best Wishes! God Bless You!!
Michael
badp
New member
So you're saying that blacks are gullible religious zealots and white Europeans are the enlightened truth-seekers?
Dear DavisBJ,
Thank you, but there is only One God!! May He choose you.
Best Regards!!
Michael
Consider The Following Evidence For Creation
• Evolution is contrary to natural laws (without exception) whereas creation is consistent with natural laws—for example, creation is consistent with the laws of thermodynamics and law of biogenesis.
• There are no known biological processes for evolution to higher levels of organization and complexity—mutations are overwhelming degenerative and none are “uphill” (that is, unequivocally beneficial) in the sense of adding new genetic information to the gene pool.
• Geologic land forms and sedimentary features are completely consistent with a worldwide flood as described in the Book of Genesis.
• Enormous limestone formations, huge coal and oil formations, and immense underground salt layers are indicative of a worldwide flood—not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Such features are satisfactorily explained by a worldwide flood and known geophysical and geochemical processes.
• A worldwide flood as described in Genesis 6–8 is within the boundaries of known geophysics—see phase diagram in chapter 4 and Pangaea Flood Video at CreationScienceToday.com.
• There is no credible technique for establishing the age of sedimentary rock—fossil dating used to establish the age of sedimentary rock suffers from circular reasoning and guesswork, all based on the assumption of evolution.
• The standard geologic column with transitional creatures evolving toward more complex forms, as depicted in most science textbooks, is utterly fictitious and misleading, and does not represent the real world. In reality, it perfectly represents the aftermath of a worldwide flood.
• There are no transitional fossils or living forms—there is not one single example of evolution! Evolutionists look for “the” missing link—ironically, they are in desperate search for just one! But there should be billions of examples of transitional forms with transitional structures if evolution were true, but there are none. The bottom line, evolution has never been observed within fossils or living populations.
• Contrary to popular belief, evidence indicates that early man was intelligent and highly skilled with an advanced social structure. There is also evidence suggesting their belief in the existence of an afterlife.
• Soft tissues and traces of blood cells have been found in dinosaur fossils supposedly 70 to 250 million years old. (Soft tissues and red blood cells have relatively short life spans.)
• Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamonds supposedly hundreds of millions of years old. (C-14 has a relatively short life-span.)
• Radioisotope dating suffers from multiple unprovable assumptions—the technique is “fatally flawed”—yet scientists contend as fact what they cannot prove.
• Abundant daughter isotopes are indicative of accelerated nuclear decay associated with creation (expansion, stretching out, or acceleration of the universe from an extremely hot, dense phase when matter and energy were concentrated) and a worldwide flood with massive restructuring of the earth’s lithosphere, not slow and gradual processes over billions of years.
• Evidences of accelerated nuclear decay in igneous rocks found worldwide are helium in zircon crystals, radio-halos and fission tracks, and rapid magnetic field reversals and decay.
• Over a hundred geochronometers indicate a young earth and universe.
Each of these evidences, examined individually, is enough to convince most Rational people that evolution is a false doctrine and the earth is, in fact, Young!
Do you want to know more? Read this website and the book, evolution – The Greatest Deception in Modern History, and be sure to visit Creation Ministries International (CMI) at Creation.com. CMI sells this book and many others including their acclaimed Creation magazine and Journal of Creation.
• Evolution is contrary to natural laws (without exception) whereas creation is consistent with natural laws—for example, creation is consistent with the laws of thermodynamics and law of biogenesis.
• There are no known biological processes for evolution to higher levels of organization and complexity—mutations are overwhelming degenerative and none are “uphill” (that is, unequivocally beneficial) in the sense of adding new genetic information to the gene pool.
• Geologic land forms and sedimentary features are completely consistent with a worldwide flood as described in the Book of Genesis.
• Enormous limestone formations, huge coal and oil formations, and immense underground salt layers are indicative of a worldwide flood—not slow and gradual processes over billions of years. Such features are satisfactorily explained by a worldwide flood and known geophysical and geochemical processes.
• A worldwide flood as described in Genesis 6–8 is within the boundaries of known geophysics—see phase diagram in chapter 4 and Pangaea Flood Video at CreationScienceToday.com.
• There is no credible technique for establishing the age of sedimentary rock—fossil dating used to establish the age of sedimentary rock suffers from circular reasoning and guesswork, all based on the assumption of evolution.
• The standard geologic column with transitional creatures evolving toward more complex forms, as depicted in most science textbooks, is utterly fictitious and misleading, and does not represent the real world. In reality, it perfectly represents the aftermath of a worldwide flood.
• There are no transitional fossils or living forms—there is not one single example of evolution! Evolutionists look for “the” missing link—ironically, they are in desperate search for just one! But there should be billions of examples of transitional forms with transitional structures if evolution were true, but there are none. The bottom line, evolution has never been observed within fossils or living populations.
• Contrary to popular belief, evidence indicates that early man was intelligent and highly skilled with an advanced social structure. There is also evidence suggesting their belief in the existence of an afterlife.
• Soft tissues and traces of blood cells have been found in dinosaur fossils supposedly 70 to 250 million years old. (Soft tissues and red blood cells have relatively short life spans.)
• Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamonds supposedly hundreds of millions of years old. (C-14 has a relatively short life-span.)
• Radioisotope dating suffers from multiple unprovable assumptions—the technique is “fatally flawed”—yet scientists contend as fact what they cannot prove.
• Abundant daughter isotopes are indicative of accelerated nuclear decay associated with creation (expansion, stretching out, or acceleration of the universe from an extremely hot, dense phase when matter and energy were concentrated) and a worldwide flood with massive restructuring of the earth’s lithosphere, not slow and gradual processes over billions of years.
• Evidences of accelerated nuclear decay in igneous rocks found worldwide are helium in zircon crystals, radio-halos and fission tracks, and rapid magnetic field reversals and decay.
• Over a hundred geochronometers indicate a young earth and universe.
Each of these evidences, examined individually, is enough to convince most Rational people that evolution is a false doctrine and the earth is, in fact, Young!
Do you want to know more? Read this website and the book, evolution – The Greatest Deception in Modern History, and be sure to visit Creation Ministries International (CMI) at Creation.com. CMI sells this book and many others including their acclaimed Creation magazine and Journal of Creation.
Last edited:
gcthomas
New member
Michael, you seem to have swallowed 150 years of anti evolution half truths and lies. Most of what you have written is plain false and demonstrably so.
Just to mention the first few, evolution is not forbidden by physics, and there are enormous quantities of transitional forms between almost all groups of species.
You have been badly misled here.
Just to mention the first few, evolution is not forbidden by physics, and there are enormous quantities of transitional forms between almost all groups of species.
You have been badly misled here.
6days
New member
Davis... I think I might have said this before but your answers often impress me, even though I disagree with you. Unlike many others you actually read and try understand what the opposing argument is. I'm glad you are part of TOL.
(Sorry slow reply... I have been offline 2 days. Will likely answer in a couple separate postings)
Sorry Davis, but this is above my pay grade. *If two geologists disagree, I'm not qualified to jump in and settle the argument. Of course though, I would lean towards the one who accepts God's Word as absolute truth. That being said.... the geologist I quoted isn't necessarily correct, but he is suggesting an interpretation of evidence that fits with the Bible.
If interested, here is an article from a Creationist who seems to agree with you that subduction is not the correct model.
http://www.icr.org/article/continental-drift-plate-tectonics-bible/
Those magnetic 'zebra' stripes, are evidence of rapid reversals during the flood.
A. Snelling, geologist says "Furthermore, the whole mantle convectional flow resulting from runaway subduction of the cold ocean-floor slabs would have suddenly cooled the mantle temperature at the core-mantle boundary, thus greatly accelerating convection in, and heat loss from, the adjacent outer core. This rapid cooling of the surface of the core would result in rapid reversals of the earth’s magnetic field."[/b]
(Sorry slow reply... I have been offline 2 days. Will likely answer in a couple separate postings)
DavisBJ said:
Sorry Davis, but this is above my pay grade. *If two geologists disagree, I'm not qualified to jump in and settle the argument. Of course though, I would lean towards the one who accepts God's Word as absolute truth. That being said.... the geologist I quoted isn't necessarily correct, but he is suggesting an interpretation of evidence that fits with the Bible.
If interested, here is an article from a Creationist who seems to agree with you that subduction is not the correct model.
http://www.icr.org/article/continental-drift-plate-tectonics-bible/
DavisBJ said:
Those magnetic 'zebra' stripes, are evidence of rapid reversals during the flood.
A. Snelling, geologist says "Furthermore, the whole mantle convectional flow resulting from runaway subduction of the cold ocean-floor slabs would have suddenly cooled the mantle temperature at the core-mantle boundary, thus greatly accelerating convection in, and heat loss from, the adjacent outer core. This rapid cooling of the surface of the core would result in rapid reversals of the earth’s magnetic field."[/b]
Huh?
At the front of my Bible it says that God said "Let US (not me) make man in OUR (not my) image". Just one of 'em?
6days
New member
*
Wow...your 'back of the envelope' calculations amaze me. Very good!*
Now, as I said, this is too technical for me but; I think there are a few things which might make your some of your calculations meaningless. For example we don't know what the pre-flood oceans were like. It would seem from scripture that shape, size and depth is different now. Also, we don't know what the depth was of 'fountains of the deep'. Now... the heat problem you mention. *Good question. I've wondered about this too. I'm going to see what I can find.*
His speculations on fountains of the deep are about a one time, unobserved event and there is no repeatable experiment that can be done to verify or refute his hypothesis. For the exact same reasons we can also say that common ancestry beliefs is not a theory.
DavisBJ said:
Wow...your 'back of the envelope' calculations amaze me. Very good!*
Now, as I said, this is too technical for me but; I think there are a few things which might make your some of your calculations meaningless. For example we don't know what the pre-flood oceans were like. It would seem from scripture that shape, size and depth is different now. Also, we don't know what the depth was of 'fountains of the deep'. Now... the heat problem you mention. *Good question. I've wondered about this too. I'm going to see what I can find.*
DavisBJ said:
His speculations on fountains of the deep are about a one time, unobserved event and there is no repeatable experiment that can be done to verify or refute his hypothesis. For the exact same reasons we can also say that common ancestry beliefs is not a theory.
Bluecheese
New member
I am of the opinion that evolution is credible, the creationism story in the Bible isn't.
- Status