Creation vs. Evolution

[wallstreeterww]

Certainly. Often intelligent design is used to buffer the old earth view. But I am willing also to discuss the ramifications of the old earth view upon the details of scripture... as I feel they inappropriately overshadow God's word.

Well, In genesis it says in English that God created the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th. That is what it says in English, but the Hebrew word used for day was YOM, and YOM can mean literal day or indefinite time period.

http://www.oldearth.org/word_study_yom.htm

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Is this some attempt to hide something? No! It is just that the arguments have already been made and creationism has already lost.

There is no actual debate here, because there is no theory of creation to consider. What actually would a creationist teach if given open an opportunity? There is nothing to teach! A fantasy story spelled "Poof!" That's it!

Stuart

Order in the Universe Declares an All Powerful God.

The Truth is Out there, for those who are Willing to Learn.

=M=

Mutation only leads to Less Species, the Species eventually become Unable to Reproduce, due to Mutation.

Survival of the Fittest, only leads to less Species of Creatures, and is not A Device, or Mechanism by which all the Various Species that We Share this Planet with, could have come about.

Evolution, is False.

===================================

Why don't you tell me about that Piltdown Man?

Why would you believe in something, People will Lie about to make it seem True?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Well, In genesis it says in English that God created the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th. That is what it says in English, but the Hebrew word used for day was YOM, and YOM can mean literal day or indefinite time period.

http://www.oldearth.org/word_study_yom.htm

If you believe that the Days were really Indefinite Time Periods, and Not 24 Hour Days, how long do you think Each Time Period Was?

Also, were they All equal Time Spans?

I'm just wondering, because OEC's say they believe the Creation Story and Order, they just want to Cram Millions of Years into the time Period known as a Day.

The Bible says that God Created Plants the Day before, He Allowed the Light from the Sun to Shine in the Firmament. So how long was that Day?

If it's more than a Month or so, Those Plants would have Died, Right?

=M=

How Many Evenings and Mornings, happen In your "Time Period", known as A Day?

 

[MichaelCadry]

Mostly... And that is why evolutionists are afraid to allow intellectual freedom in classrooms. They don't want students exposed to the weaknesses of Darwinian theory, or to hear from scientists who disagree.
However... even though some are only exposed to evolutionism, they eventually see that it is just a belief system. Biologists such as Gary Parker were committed totally to atheism and evolutionism...now is firmly committed to Biblical creation.
Or world renowned geneticist Dr John Sanford says...
‘I was totally sold on evolution. It was my religion; it defined how I saw everything, it was my value system and my reason for being. Later, I came to believe in “God”, but this still did not significantly change my intellectual outlook regarding origins. However, still later, as I began to personally know and submit to Jesus, I started to be fundamentally changed—in every respect. This included my mind, and how I viewed science and history. I would not say that science led me to the Lord (which is the experience of some). Rather I would say Jesus opened my eyes to His creation—I was blind, and gradually I could see. It sounds simple, but it was a slow and painful process. I still only see “as through a glass, darkly”

Dear 6days,

Thank you so much for that REVEALING post. That is just WONDERFUL. And they were atheists and evolutionists? That is just awesome for everyone out there. That is another soul saved and another soul going to Heaven, that we don't have to pull from the darkness anymore. PRAISE GOD!!

AND JESUS AND THE HOLY GHOST!!!

Michael

 

[wallstreeterww]

Well, one biologist mouthing off publicly without reason against Darwin might be concerning because that undoes so much of the work that biology teachers are compelled to do as part of their jobs. A few kids come along to school parroting like you, and that is disruptive to dealing with reality, as science classes should. But equally there are high-profile biologists who are profoundly religious who champion the teaching of evolution. So which religious nutcases do you think the education boards should be consulting?

Is this some attempt to hide something? No! It is just that the arguments have already been made and creationism has already lost.

There is no actual debate here, because there is no theory of creation to consider. What actually would a creationist teach if given open an opportunity? There is nothing to teach! A fantasy story spelled "Poof!" That's it!

Stuart

That is your opinion Stuu, and the fact that you paint all creationists with the same brush tells me that you have FAITH in evolution. As a former evolutionist of 41 years I left evolution not because of theological reasons (most Catholics and most of my relatives believe in evolution), but I left it because it just doesn't hold par in 2 main areas, specified complex information and macroevolution.
yes and one ofthem is professor Kenneth Miller, hes an evolutionist and a Catholic, and I used to follow his work when I was an evolutionist
And no one was bigger advocate of evolution then I was until I sat myself down, looked at some of their claims , ibnstead of listening to the majority like u do, and I actually researched it and formed my own opinion. Hundreds of years ago the majority of scientists believed that maggots came from crap. If you and me were alive back then you would have used the standard "all scientists say it comes from crap, therefore it comes from crap" Scientists are not immune to interpreting evidence according to their worldview and for right now the dominant worldview is materialism and Darwinism.

It doesn't mean that I have to blindly accept what they want me to accept because of an appeal to authority. Now if the evidence changes I have absolutely no problem coming back to evolution as it doesn't effect me theologically speaking at all.

My speciality was I loved researching animals of the carboniferous and Permian period because the animals then were what I considered very exotic. Dinosaurs to me became so yesterday in a hurry

Ironically it ws Doctor Stephen Meyer who I thought was ridiculous when I was an evolutionist that pulled me away from evolution into intelligent design. I never took his stuff seriously but when I decided to look at what he was saying honestly, that's when the hinges fell off and I left evolution. It was during the time or right after his video called the signature in the cell came out.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Mostly... And that is why evolutionists are afraid to allow intellectual freedom in classrooms. They don't want students exposed to the weaknesses of Darwinian theory, or to hear from scientists who disagree.
However... even though some are only exposed to evolutionism, they eventually see that it is just a belief system. Biologists such as Gary Parker were committed totally to atheism and evolutionism...now is firmly committed to Biblical creation.
Or world renowned geneticist Dr John Sanford says...
‘I was totally sold on evolution. It was my religion; it defined how I saw everything, it was my value system and my reason for being. Later, I came to believe in “God”, but this still did not significantly change my intellectual outlook regarding origins. However, still later, as I began to personally know and submit to Jesus, I started to be fundamentally changed—in every respect. This included my mind, and how I viewed science and history. I would not say that science led me to the Lord (which is the experience of some). Rather I would say Jesus opened my eyes to His creation—I was blind, and gradually I could see. It sounds simple, but it was a slow and painful process. I still only see “as through a glass, darkly”

Dear 6days,

That is GREAT NEWS for Gary Parker and John Sanford. They are breaking chains that are nearly impossible to break!! KUDOS!!!

God Bless You Always,

Michael

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

it just doesn't hold par in 2 main areas, specified complex information and macroevolution.

Oh, Well that's For Sure.

Evolution, is Obviously False. The Theory of Evolution doesn't Contain Any Sort of Mechanism, that can Actually lead to the Variation of Living Organisms We Observe in The World Around Us.

=M=

Now, about that Long Day Theory, you seem to have a Death Grip on.

After All, No One Should believe in Evolution; It's just So Unbelievable, Even Catholics won't Believe it!

Well, Real Catholics. Barbie, is of Course the Exception to the Rule.

Either Way, if you don't think you have a Problem, with Plants without light living for an "Extended Period of Time", I'm happy to have Diversity here, OECs are Great!!! They almost Get it.


Of Course, I guess if you Follow the Commandments of God, and Believe Jesus is His Son, I guess you do Get It, and you Still win.


If you don't mind me Asking, WallStreet; What Kind of "Evidence" For Evolution, would you Need, to Persuade you back to Being an Evolutionist?

 

[wallstreeterww]

Oh, Well that's For Sure.

Evolution, is Obviously False. The Theory doesn't Contain Any Sort of Mechanism, that can Actually lead to the Variation of Living Organisms We Observe in The World Around Us.

=M=

Now, about that Long Day Theory, you seem to have a Death Grip on.

Correct about the mechanism, but what eventually brought me out of evolution was the specified complex arrangments of the nucleotide bases within DNA itself which cant be explained by invoking chemical affinities and blind chance, in other words no evolutionary mechanisms can explain it.

Now about that long day, I have known the meaning of yome for most of my life. My parents were born in the mountains of Lebanon and everyone that speaks Levantine Arabic knows that the word YOM can be used to denote either a literal day or indefinite time period. The problem when translating from Hebrew to English is that many Hebrew words had multiple meanings.

What I don't understand is why do young earth creationist have a tough time accepting an old earth? The bible doesn't specify whether those days were long or short because God knows that they aren't needed for our salvation.

The bible itself gives us lots of leeway to research this issue and come up with an opinion on it.

 

[Ben Masada]

Creation vs. Evolution

Both, creation and evolution are perfectly in tune with the truth. Creation is akin to be caused to exist and evolution to expansion. First, the universe was caused to exist because from the logical point of view, it could not have caused itself to exist. Then the command, metaphorically of course, was given to grow and multiply. In other words, to expand or evolve as Science has demonstrated that the universe does expand. Hence Albert Einstein, when asked if he believed in God, for an answer, he said that all his life was trying to catch God at His work of Creation. Whereas in a tune of joke or not as some have considered that option, the connection had been established by this famous scientist between Creation and Expansion. (From his book "Out of My Later Years")

 

[The Barbarian]

Correct about the mechanism, but what eventually brought me out of evolution was the specified complex arrangments of the nucleotide bases within DNA itself which cant be explained by invoking chemical affinities and blind chance,

Darwin's great discovery was that it wasn't by chance.

in other words no evolutionary mechanisms can explain it.

Random mutation and natural selection. BTW, evolution isn't about the way DNA first appeared. It's about the way existing life changes.

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Correct about the mechanism, but what eventually brought me out of evolution was the specified complex arrangments of the nucleotide bases within DNA itself which cant be explained by invoking chemical affinities and blind chance, in other words no evolutionary mechanisms can explain it.

Now about that long day, I have known the meaning of yome for most of my life. My parents were born in the mountains of Lebanon and everyone that speaks Levantine Arabic knows that the word YOM can be used to denote either a literal day or indefinite time period. The problem when translating from Hebrew to English is that many Hebrew words had multiple meanings.

What I don't understand is why do young earth creationist have a tough time accepting an old earth? The bible doesn't specify whether those days were long or short because God knows that they aren't needed for our salvation.

The bible itself gives us lots of leeway to research this issue and come up with an opinion on it.

YES!!!!!

You must be Pretty Smart, Just like this Guy.

Dr. Francis Collins - A Scientist From the Human Genome Research Institute

=M=

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Darwin's great discovery was that it wasn't by chance.



Random mutation and natural selection. BTW, evolution isn't about the way DNA first appeared. It's about the way existing life changes.

BARBIE!!!

I knew you were Creeping around.

How are ya Old Gal?

=M=

Mutation and Survival of the Fittest only leads to Less Species, not More. Your thought Process is Downright Unreasonable.

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

Also, WallStreet, I accept an Old Earth. I just don't accept Long Time Periods called Days, which are longer than one Day, that only Contain a Single Evening and Morning.

What are the Hebrew Words used at the End of Each Creation Day Description, which are Said in English as Evening and Morning, Do they mean, Not Evening and Morning, in Hebrew?

=M=

Also, How do you justify, God allowing the Sun To Shine Through the Firmament, a Day After He Created Plants?
How did the Plants Survive?
I mean, if you think that the Days were really Time Periods of Thousands, if not Millions of Years.

 

[Stuu]

So, you are really more of an agnostic then?

More of an agnostic than what?

Can you acknowledge that thousands of scientists are comvinced that evidence points to the Creator?

I'm sure there are thousands of scientists who feel convinced in that way. I have no idea how they do the mental gymnastics though. They must stop one part of their brains from communicating with other parts.

You can intepret anything you like in terms of god conspiracy theories. The important aspect is that there is no unambiguous evidence for any god claim ever.

And no of course I'm not willing consider there not being a Creator. I'm totally biased!! We have the eye witness account and the evidence.

Eye witness account of what, exactly?

Its too bad you don't insist on unambiguous evidence for your evolutionary beliefs.

I absolutely insist upon it. I would change my view if there were unambiguous evidence to the contrary. Don't forget that I am not interested in dogmas, only the best explanations. If a god explanation is the best one, then I'm all for it. But there isn't any god explanation for anything which stands up to the requirement that it be based in unambiguous evidence. So you can be as biased as you like, but if you want me as a convert you will have to be convincing to a high standard.

You aren't.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

Order in the Universe Declares an All Powerful God.

How?

Mutation only leads to Less Species, the Species eventually become Unable to Reproduce, due to Mutation.

Survival of the Fittest, only leads to less Species of Creatures, and is not A Device, or Mechanism by which all the Various Species that We Share this Planet with, could have come about.

Evolution, is False.

This is evidence that you can't learn. There could be a causal link between that and your admitted use of cannabis. You have nothing to contribute until you are in a state to learn.

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

That is your opinion Stuu, and the fact that you paint all creationists with the same brush tells me that you have FAITH in evolution.

If you can disprove it then I will be there all the way with you. I would love to see how such a monumental change in science would play out. I am only interested in believing things that can reasonably be said to be true. If evolution by natural selection isn't true then I want to know so I can correct myself.

As a former evolutionist of 41 years I left evolution not because of theological reasons (most Catholics and most of my relatives believe in evolution), but I left it because it just doesn't hold par in 2 main areas, specified complex information and macroevolution.
yes and one ofthem is professor Kenneth Miller, hes an evolutionist and a Catholic, and I used to follow his work when I was an evolutionist. And no one was bigger advocate of evolution then I was until I sat myself down, looked at some of their claims , ibnstead of listening to the majority like u do, and I actually researched it and formed my own opinion. Hundreds of years ago the majority of scientists believed that maggots came from crap. If you and me were alive back then you would have used the standard "all scientists say it comes from crap, therefore it comes from crap" Scientists are not immune to interpreting evidence according to their worldview and for right now the dominant worldview is materialism and Darwinism. It doesn't mean that I have to blindly accept what they want me to accept because of an appeal to authority. Now if the evidence changes I have absolutely no problem coming back to evolution as it doesn't effect me theologically speaking at all. My speciality was I loved researching animals of the carboniferous and Permian period because the animals then were what I considered very exotic. Dinosaurs to me became so yesterday in a hurry Ironically it ws Doctor Stephen Meyer who I thought was ridiculous when I was an evolutionist that pulled me away from evolution into intelligent design. I never took his stuff seriously but when I decided to look at what he was saying honestly, that's when the hinges fell off and I left evolution. It was during the time or right after his video called the signature in the cell came out.

I see, so you have nothing to tell me that should change my mind.

By the way, I have never met an "evolutionist" before. What was it like being one?

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

That is GREAT NEWS for Gary Parker and John Sanford. They are breaking chains that are nearly impossible to break!! KUDOS!!

What, you mean breaking the chains of sanity?

Stuart

 

[Stuu]

the universe was caused to exist because from the logical point of view, it could not have caused itself to exist.

Since when did the universe feel compelled to conform to human logic?

Stuart

 

[Mark SeaSigh]

How?

Stuart

Entropy

=M=

Did you know, that whenever an Atheist cannot Explain a Natural Phenomenon, they Say Time Did it.

Did time do this, also?

Notice the Order in these Rocks, Do you think someone Stacked them? Or, Do you think that Nature, Put them together, just So, Over Lots and Lots of Time?

Now, consider that, it is way more Likely that Nature stacked these Rocks, than it is that Nature, formed living Organisms from Dirt, Naturally.



Do you believe, Using Reasoning; that Nature Stacked these Rocks? Or, do you think some person walking on the beach came along, and Stacked up these Tiny Rocks, in just the Right order so that they Stand Alone, one atop the other?

The same can Be applied to the Order we observe in DNA in Living Organisms here on Earth.

The Elaborate Order that We Observe in DNA Structure, could only be a Result of an Intelligence that is Capable of Creating that Order.

 

[Stuu]

BARBIE!!!

I knew you were Creeping around.

How are ya Old Gal?

Remind me. What is the usual half-life of THC in the human body? How long does it take for its effects retarding learning take to wear off?

Stuart