Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Does evolution contradict creationism?
Talk Origins ^ | 1998 | Warren Kurt VonRoeschlaub

Posted on 11/30/2004 3:53:55 PM PST by shubi

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,001-1,048 next last
God use evolution to create all life.

Those that do not believe in evolution, do not believe in God.

1 posted on 11/30/2004 3:53:55 PM PST by shubi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: shubi

When the evolutionists explain how the universe evolved then we can pay attention to them.


3 posted on 11/30/2004 3:58:48 PM PST by ex-snook (Moral values - The GOP must now walk the talk - no excuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Yo shubi...I suspect you are correct again...God is bigger than definition...he is bigger than simple explanation...

"Believers...believe in Him...don't hang on language...hang on His Spirit...He is Big...

and He loves you...and that is the thing that is so great for you and me...He loves us (don't sweat the details...He is in control).

4 posted on 11/30/2004 3:59:41 PM PST by weenie (Islam is as "dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

Biological evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the universe or its subsiquent evolution. That is the field of cosmology, astronomy and physics.


5 posted on 11/30/2004 4:01:00 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: William Creel

Sure we can. The people who argue against science misinterpret the Bible.


6 posted on 11/30/2004 4:01:37 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: weenie

Right you are, brother.


7 posted on 11/30/2004 4:02:31 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: shubi

God bless you, man. Keep up the good work...Jon


8 posted on 11/30/2004 4:04:34 PM PST by weenie (Islam is as "dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog." -- Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: shubi
God use evolution to create all life. Those that do not believe in evolution, do not believe in God.

I don't know what god you acknowledge, but it certainly is not the same one that Christians recognize.

Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."

Notice that it says "days", not "billions of years".

Evolution claims that history was drenched in blood from claw and tooth for thousands and tens of thousands of years prior to the arrival of man. Since the gospel message is based on the fundamental belief that it was Adam's sin that introduced death to the creation, how do you harmonize evolution's death and misery with (Genesis 1:31) "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day."

9 posted on 11/30/2004 4:14:17 PM PST by Reuben Hick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick

Yom is the Hebrew word for day. If you will look at the first several verses of Genesis 2 you will find the key to translating the meaning of yom in Genesis 1 (The first several verses of 2 are a continuation of Genesis 1. The chapters were done without regard to completed passages.

It is clear that yom means an indefinite period of time. This is in conformance for God's using evolution to provide a changing life to a changing environment.


10 posted on 11/30/2004 4:20:36 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: shubi
It is clear that yom means an indefinite period of time. This is in conformance for God's using evolution to provide a changing life to a changing environment

With all due respect, you have demonstrated a remarkable ignorance of Hebrew grammar. You may be able to find a dictionary a cherry pick a definition from it, but that is a common fraud that evolutionists use to bully creationists.

Any time "yom" is used with a number, it always means a regular day. Anytime "yom" is used in conjuction with the word "morning", it means a regular day. Everytime "yom" is used in relation to "evening" it means a regular day. So can you take a wild guess as to what rule of grammar applies when the word "yom" appears with (1) a number, (2) morning and (3) evening as it repeatedly does in Genesis, Exodus and Deuteronomy?

Also, it appears that you are unwilling to answer the doctrinal question regarding the appearance of death in the Creation in relation to Adam. Your original post was quite insulting and immflamatory in that you categorically called Christians who reject atheistic evolution as unbelievers. Yet you can't seem to grasp how evolution attacks the very core of the gospel message.

Another question for you, not doctrinal, but indicative of your attitude towards the veracity of the Scriptures: Given that the Global Flood is described in the Genesis narrative, and the flood is declared by God to be sent to destroy all "that breathes" (save those aboard the ark), wouldn't that same catastrophy also destroy all of that so-called evidence prior to the antediluvians?

Take your time... :)

11 posted on 11/30/2004 4:36:42 PM PST by Reuben Hick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: shubi
If the question is whether evolution contradicts a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis as an exact historical account, then it does. This is the main, and for the most part only, point of conflict between those who believe in evolution and creationists.

.........

1 posted on 11/30/2004 4:53:55 PM MST by shubi


To understand G-d and Genesis as science try reading :

The Hidden Face of God: Science Reveals the Ultimate Truth

The Science of God

Genesis and the Big Bang Theory : The Discovery Of Harmony Between Modern Science And The Bible


by GERALD SCHROEDER Ph. D.


His willing bondslave

chuck

12 posted on 11/30/2004 4:52:09 PM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Y'shua == YHvH is my Salvation (Psalm 118-14))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick

That exodus quote did not mention the creation of life - only "heaven and earth, the sea..." and then the nebulous "all that in them is". That does not rule out life coming about via evolution. Is there a passage that specifies creation of all plants, animals, fungi, etc?

I think it is also noteworthy that the Bible says God created people from clay - and recent hypotheses regarding the formation of the first organic compounds and forerunners of the first single-celled life forms is centered around the quantity of exposed clay in the Earth's early years and the qualities of clay that would enable it to be a catalyst for synthesis of those substances.


13 posted on 11/30/2004 5:30:25 PM PST by Voice in your head ("The secret of Happiness is Freedom, and the secret of Freedom, Courage." - Thucydides)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick
What are your credentials in Hebrew? I am quite accomplished at it. Your ideas on numbers with yom are quaint, but not held by most Hebrew scholars, just proof texting types who want to justify misinterpreting God's Word.

I think the Adam and Eve story is almost completely a story about the Spirit and not about physical life and death. Also, any tales adapted from pagan cultures like Adam and Eve and Noah are, are bound to be fraught with danger in literal interpretation.

The whole point of this thread is there is nothing about science or evolution that attacks God. Since God made evolution and science to allow our stewardship of the Earth, it is you who might be departing from God's will in your unwillingness to accept God's works. By denying God's works, aren't you denying God?
14 posted on 11/30/2004 5:51:17 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head

There are a lot of amazing truths revealed in the Hebrew of Genesis 1, if you go deeply into the Hebrew and apply it to modern science. Let there be light is quite equivalent to E=mc2. By the first act of making "light" or primordial energy all matter could have been made.

Taken this way, the Bible supports the Big Bang hypothesis.


15 posted on 11/30/2004 5:54:34 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head
That exodus quote did not mention the creation of life

Well there of course is the Genesis narrative that provides better detail. Yet I am stumped in trying to guess how you interpret the phrase in Exodus 20 "...and all that is in them..." to somehow exclude life. What else could it possibly be?

The reason I chose the Exodus passage is that I know many people have rationalized away Genesis, as you are trying to rationalize away this one too. Many people say something like "God is big enough to use evolution" but refuse to acknowledge that the same God is also big enough to do so in an instant or in six literal days. There is reason for all of Creation being six literal days, and that is why I posted the Exodus passage. For those who claim to be Christians and deny six literal days are the same people who will deny the Sabbath which is one of the Top Ten commandments, for the Sabbath has its foundation in the six day Creation.

I think it is also noteworthy that the Bible says God created people from clay

Why stop there? Have evolutionists explained abiogenesis or the transformation of inorganic material into organic material? In order to be scientific, making life out of non-life must be demonstrated, otherwise the claim that life came from non-life via an "accident" is nothing but religious ramblings and speculation. The Goo to You Theorists must make many miraculous claims in their attempt to deny the miracle of Creation. Its clearly a rejection of one religion for the adoption of another. What is shameful is that the Johnny-come-lately worshippers of the House of Chance arrogantly state that their Science that is not science proves the existance of the god of Chance. All it really proves is that they have a particular dogmatic bias in the examination of evidence.

16 posted on 12/01/2004 5:08:38 AM PST by Reuben Hick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: shubi
What are your credentials in Hebrew? I am quite accomplished at it.

Considering your butchering of it as the only example, your claim is as comical as all of the other provocative statements made so far in this thread. As an aside, I am always curious as to why those who believe in a day-age theory demand that "yom", in this context, can only be understood in an age sense, but never in a regular day sense.

The whole point of this thread is there is nothing about science or evolution that attacks God.

Clever yet deceptive how you bundle "science" and "evolution" as if they are the same. True science does not attack God since the founders of much of our scientific theory were believers in God and in Creation.

You are treading in the waters of blasphemy when you state that there is nothing about evolution that attacks God. Don't you remember the Scopes "Monkey" trial? Are you so uninformed about the debate that you ignore the fact that evolution was invented purely as a way to remove God from the culture? Evolution is the antithesis of Creation and is the primary religion of Hell that removes the Creator and replaces Him with Chance.

But since you claim that science is working here, then perhaps you can explain how plants, which require C02 and sunlight in order to survive (we will ignore symbiotic relationships with critters for pollination for the moment) were able to do so without the sun. In the narrative, plants appeared on day three and the sun appeared on day four. According to your calculus, that would mean that in total darkness and temperatures approaching absolute zero, plants were thriving and reproducing for "billions of years" until the sun and its energy finally showed up.

The "whole point of the thread" has been a showcase of lies on your part, especially when you open up with the outrageous and highly offensive lie "Those who don't believe in evolution don't beleive in God". Since evolution has its own origins in the nineteenth century, it follows that you condemn all of humanity before Darwin to Hell on the basis of your own confusion.

Furthermore, I have been patient in giving you ample opportunity to add meat to the bones of your statements. Rather, after telling everyone who doesn't suck-up to atheistic evolution that they are going to Hell you come out and deny the Scriptures as Truth. This is what makes your opening statement even more ironic. You reject Scriptures, call God a liar, embrace atheistic evolution, then call those who believe Scripture, love God, reject pagan explanations of origins as those who "don't believe in God".

I think the Adam and Eve story is almost completely a story about the Spirit and not about physical life and death.

Of course you would. Because if you believed it to be true then it would confirm the Gospel and condemn secular human achievement to vanity. But riddle me this, we have something called a geneology. Most people skip over it because it is boring, but it is there for a reason. It provides a chain of men to link with history. Now since you reject Adam and Eve and I am guessing the first few thousand years of human existance as "a story" rather than history, can you point out in the geneology exactly where history ends and allegory begins?

I know, I know, you will blow off this question too because you would rather blindly believe athiests and God haters rather than think for yourself.

17 posted on 12/01/2004 5:45:07 AM PST by Reuben Hick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: shubi

For the atheist, the simple yet difficult scientific phenomena to explain is the difference between the universal Scientific God, entropy, vs. the Earthly natural Scientific God, evolution. Remember entropy, the force behind the big bang and the awesome power of the universe, predicts systems should “evolve” from a state of order to disorder. Evolution, observed on the planet Earth, predicts systems are evolving from a state of disorder to order. If the scientific God is all that is and ever was, it has the same level of confusion and identity as the Democratic Party.


18 posted on 12/01/2004 9:54:39 AM PST by kipita (Rebel – the proletariat response to Aristocracy and Exploitation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick; shubi
Reuben Hick ; shubi

..................................

Clever yet deceptive how you bundle "science" and "evolution" as if they are the same. True science does not attack God since the founders of much of our scientific theory were believers in God and in Creation

.......................

17 posted on 12/01/2004 6:45:07 AM MST by Reuben Hick

Evolution is a hypothetical construct for which there is no corroborating data.

A course in the "Philosophy of Science" will show that evolution is not science but a construct without proof.

i.e. evolution is a religion with less proof than the Bible.


His willing bondslave

chuck

19 posted on 12/01/2004 11:14:15 AM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Y'shua == YHvH is my Salvation (Psalm 118-14))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick

sWhat are your credentials in Hebrew? I am quite accomplished at it.
rConsidering your butchering of it as the only example, your claim is as comical as all of the other provocative statements made so far in this thread. As an aside, I am always curious as to why those who believe in a day-age theory demand that "yom", in this context, can only be understood in an age sense, but never in a regular day sense.

How do you know I butchered it? You just don't want to accept the truth. You think that your limited knowledge of Hebrew, which I suspect is zero, allows you to know what yom means in Genesis? The reason you must accept the indefinite period translation is because if you don't Genesis does not comport with reality. Therefore you are denying the truth of God using evolution to create different forms of life on Earth over long periods of time.

There are several other technical reasons why yom cannot be day in Genesis 1, but I am not going to waste my time enlightening you, as you seem more intent on insult and ridicule instead of education.


20 posted on 12/01/2004 2:14:33 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: kipita

What are you smoking?


21 posted on 12/01/2004 2:21:29 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt

A course in truth will tell you that the Theory of Evolution is all science. The TOE is one of the most magnificent Theories ever discovered. It explains how life changes as the Earth changes over millions of years.

It is science, because there are mountains of scientific data collected over 150 years that all fits into the Theory.

A hypothesis is a testable idea. Scientists do not set out to “prove” hypotheses, but to test them. Often multiple hypotheses are posed to explain phenomena and the goal of research is to eliminate the incorrect ones. Hypotheses come and go by the thousands, but theories often remain to be tested and modified for decades or centuries. In science, theories are never hunches or guesses and to describe evolution as “just a theory” is inappropriate.

“Do you believe in evolution?” is a question often asked of biology teachers by their puzzled students. The answer is, “No, I accept the fact that the Earth is very old and life has changed over billions of years because that is what the evidence tells us.” Science is not about belief—it is about making inferences based on evidence


22 posted on 12/01/2004 2:25:59 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Evolutionary Theory is hostile to the very core of Christian belief. You cannot impute original sin to the human race if we all descended from tribes of apes. No original parents, no sin in those parents (thus transmitted to all offspring). No orginal sin committed by the first parents? Then sin cannot be removed by the new head of the human race...Christ. Article of faith, but never the less you cannot smuggle the ideas of Evolution into true Christian faith. Your faith becomes worthless. Either we are damned under inescapable sin and in need of a Divine deliverer, or we can work it out ourselves. So far I see no evidence that humanity can work out how to bring peace to the Middle East, let alone deliver itself from greed, lust, hatred, wars, violence, perversion...no matter how smart we think we have become. Smarter we get, the more lethal our weapons.
23 posted on 12/01/2004 2:43:50 PM PST by Jehu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Those that do not believe in evolution, do not believe in God.

Don't know if I can agree with that.

That the laws of Nature and Nature's God employ the agency of natural selection, I believe there is ample evidence for. The process of getting a callous on one's hand, the process of acquiring a new skill, can be described as "evolutionary" in a sense, though "adaptability" would be a more accurate term for the same process.

Anyway, it happens all the time in all time frames and has no bearing whatsoever on the event of Creation, any more than a car has a bearing on its designer.

24 posted on 12/01/2004 2:50:23 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (if a man lives long enough, he gets to see the same thing over and over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shubi
You do not understand what science is.

You are confused by the religion of the evil one.

What science is :

Someone builds a hypothetical construct.

Collects some data ; proposes a theory.

Runs an empirical experiment for the length of time of the construct.( 15 billion years )

Runs the experiment a second time for the length of time of the construct. ( 15 billion years )

Documents the experiment.

Another investigator constructs the identical experiment.

Runs the experiment a third time for the length of time of the construct. ( 15 billion years )

Publishes and you now have a theory.

Are any of your scientists 50 billion years old ?


I think not !

They are practicing religion not science.

Read GERALD SCHROEDER !


Trust G-d, not man.


His willing bondslave

chuck

25 posted on 12/01/2004 3:25:25 PM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Y'shua == YHvH is my Salvation (Psalm 118-14))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick
"Yet I am stumped in trying to guess how you interpret the phrase in Exodus 20 '...and all that is in them...' to somehow exclude life. What else could it possibly be?"

Matter. That is, matter, as opposed to organized matter. Given that interpretation, the author of the thread is consistent. And, I think that is how he interprets it.

"The reason I chose the Exodus passage is that I know many people have rationalized away Genesis, as you are trying to rationalize away this one too."

I don't have an agenda to tear down Exodus - I was just pointing out that there is an another interpretation. I don't claim to be right.

"Have evolutionists explained abiogenesis or the transformation of inorganic material into organic material?"

In terms of developing a law or principle that says elements A and B mix together via X process to produce Y life form - no. Hypotheses, based upon current assumptions of what the Earth's early environment was like, have been formulated to try to explain how synthesis of organic molecules and formation of ordered systems demonstrating homeostatic properties could have occured. The merit of these hypotheses has been reinforced by recreation in laboratories. Their weakness lies in whether we have accurately assumed what the Earth's early environment was like and determining if said reactions occured. No matter how plausible, possible, convenient, et cetera, if the reactions didn't occur, then it does nothing to shed light on how life began.

26 posted on 12/01/2004 4:34:46 PM PST by Voice in your head ("The secret of Happiness is Freedom, and the secret of Freedom, Courage." - Thucydides)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jehu

Your point is that apes don't sin? This is why creationism is so much fun. Good thing I wasn't drinking coffee when I read this one.


27 posted on 12/01/2004 5:32:02 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand

s; Those that do not believe in evolution, do not believe in God.
t; Don't know if I can agree with that.

t; That the laws of Nature and Nature's God employ the agency of natural selection, I believe there is ample evidence for. The process of getting a callous on one's hand, the process of acquiring a new skill, can be described as "evolutionary" in a sense, though "adaptability" would be a more accurate term for the same process.

S: Heeheeeheee Thank Mr. Lamarck.

t:Anyway, it happens all the time in all time frames and has no bearing whatsoever on the event of Creation, any more than a car has a bearing on its designer.

S: While I can tell you have no clue what an allele is, you are entirely correct that the Darwin's Theory does not include creation. Biology doesn't care who created first life, it just works with the life that we see in the fossil record and here now.



28 posted on 12/01/2004 5:36:39 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt

You do not understand what science is.
You are confused by the religion of the evil one.

x; What science is :

Someone builds a hypothetical construct.

Collects some data ; proposes a theory.

Runs an empirical experiment for the length of time of the construct.( 15 billion years )

s Hahahahaaaaarrrrrgggggaaaaakkkkkkrrrrccchhhh

God sorted the dinosaurs in the strata in chronological order as a practical joke. Thanks for your input. Now I have get a new keyboard.


29 posted on 12/01/2004 5:39:39 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: shubi

i think you've dialed the wrong number, swami.


30 posted on 12/01/2004 5:54:32 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (if a man lives long enough, he gets to see the same thing over and over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: shubi
I pray one day you accept Y'shua as L-rd and and Savior.


a bondslave to the Christ
chuck
31 posted on 12/01/2004 6:20:53 PM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Y'shua == YHvH is my Salvation (Psalm 118-14))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt

Hey dummy, I am a Christian Minister.

Just because someone has a brain and doesn't believe nonsensical interpretations of the KJV Bible doesn't mean they aren't Christian.

I think you have crossed the line in judging lest ye be judged.


32 posted on 12/01/2004 6:23:24 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: shubi

I've been addicted to smoking the factual reality pipe for some 22 years. If the universe is driven by one force and the Earth is driven by another force (opposite force), then that would make the Earth the most important point in the universe. Furthermore, SETI has been searching for evolved beings for years, but have found nothing. Being a lifelong Louisiana Catholic (a double negative?) I'm not very religious but I'm a conservative scientist and IT Engineer who evaluates life based on facts, logic, and a belief in a higher Deity.


33 posted on 12/01/2004 11:42:39 PM PST by kipita (Rebel – the proletariat response to Aristocracy and Exploitation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Voice in your head
Matter. That is, matter, as opposed to organized matter. Given that interpretation, the author of the thread is consistent. And, I think that is how he interprets it.

This is the problem with discussing things through intermediaries... oh well, tag team wrestling lives. How do I state this without sounding real insulting? Without getting into a discussion about Messrs J,E,D and P, it is standard orthodoxy to accept that one man was responsible for providing us with the Pentateuch which includes both Exodus and Genesis. Since the author of Genesis is the same as Exdous, and the author of Genesis plainly stated that living plants preceded sunlight and critters were on dry land on the sixth day, it would be just a simple matter of applying Occam's Razor to the matter and assume that Moses was not as conflicted as those who seriously attempt to deconstruct his words.

Normally I would be puzzled with why intelligent people who treat scientists as infallible priests and praise the scientific process and logical reasoning as two members of the secular trinity would be so obtuse when given something so simple as this, but the answer was given in the same Scriptures that confound those who simply will accept anything but Truth, and will reject Truth everytime they hear it. (Re: 1 Cor 2:14, and 2 Peter 3:5) So I don't struggle with it anymore, just amused by it.

"Have evolutionists explained abiogenesis or the transformation of inorganic material into organic material?"

[Convoluted backpedaling snipped and translated]?"No"

34 posted on 12/02/2004 3:59:03 AM PST by Reuben Hick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kipita

Okkkkkkkk


35 posted on 12/02/2004 4:04:33 AM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: kipita
Furthermore, SETI has been searching for evolved beings for years, but have found nothing.

Hey, but it keeps the evolutionists busy on their constant quest for little green men that are smarter than them. Let each child have their toys.

What I find so ridiculous about this foolishness called SETI (well there are many things that I find ridiculous about it) is that those who get into it are mathematically challenged.

The usual story goes like this: Creationist brings up the mathematic improbability practical impossibility of random elements organising themselves into a viable protein chain. Evilutionists wave their hands, declare yet another miracle by their god Chance and declare by fiat a living protein. Then the Creationist reminds them of the mathematical improbability practical impossibility of this protein chain somehow being able to reproduce itself to make a faithful copy. Evilutionists declare another miracle. The Creationist points out the mathematical improbability practical impossibility of this protein chain making a beneficial mutation. No problem, Chance whips out another miracle by violating physical laws and introducing new information into a system. This "game" continues on ad infinitum.

When the Creationist presses the mathematical improbabilities practical impossibilities of any of these things, we are told that infinite monkeys given enough time will compose all the works of Shakespeare hence the necessity for "billions of years". Nevermind the fact that there is no "infinite" number of molecules.

The creationist then patiently reminds the mathematically challenged evilutionists that the atmosphere of the Earth is unique for fostering life. If Earth was any closer or further from the sun, if gravity or the composition was any different... Yep, that's right, the god of Chance performs another miracle and we are told that there are billions and billions of other planets out there, the evidence for these planets is not observation, but by the fact that there are planets in this solar system, there must be planets in other solar systems.

From these billions and billions of planets out there, that no one can find or prove through scientific means, the god of Chance has been feverishly working in combining more molecules into intelligent beings. But these are special beings, much more brilliant than we are, for of these billions and billions of planets out there, many are likely to be thousands and ten thousands of light years away.

These being are so special that when their media entertainment directors get together with their engineers they ask questions like: "Can you make an antennae and transmitter strong enough to reach our audience one hundred thousand light years away on Earth?" The engineers scratch their multiple green heads and ask "is there anyone on Earth that would care?" Then the executives talk about marketing research and how their writers have written material that will go over so well in Western Earth Culture one hundred thousand years from now.

These green creatures are also special in that they are truly forward thinking. Here on earth we think we are so clever to bury time capsules that should be opened after one hundred years. These little green men believe that two hundred thousand years from now (the round trip time for a signal to reach Earth and for us to respond immediately) their spawn will benefit from what we have to say.

Think about that for a moment. Considering where the evilutionists say that man was one hundred thousand years ago, and given how much technology and culture has changed in just the last one hundred years, who gives a rip about anything two hundred thousand years away? Like we are going to have a conversation?

But the mathematically challenged evilutionist has great hopes and such they rig up these dish antennaes, and devote their employer's computers into sifting through random noise looking for alien porn to watch.

And they laugh at Creationists...

36 posted on 12/02/2004 5:10:18 AM PST by Reuben Hick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: shubi
My point is that Christianity and Evolution are mutually exclusive. You cannot smuggle even a modified Evolution into Christianity, and still have any need of the sacrifice of Christ (as one man) to eliminate sin that came into the world (through one man).

I have not even addressed the fact that evolution is NOT proven, and is essentially unprovable, as such, it is a faith, not science. All the fossil evidence backs sudden appearances of species. There are at least 5 major global catastrophic extinctions shown in the fossil record. All of these speak of sudden acts of creation, or destruction, not the slow evolution over time as evolutionary theory predicts.

Not to mention that you date your checkbook from the appearance of Christ on this earth whether you believe in him or not. Yet not a single human being has ever observed one species "evolving" from another. Even if you combine near species, such as a horse and donkey, you get sterile offspring (mules). Which confirms the Genisis account that said things will have seed in them bearing fruit after their own kind. Tell me, plant a Tangelo seed and what do you get? You don't get Tangelo's!

Now I ask you, prophet of a false religion: What mechanism can you offer that produces symbiotic relationships among species? You are not allowed to use any form of teleology to propose such a mechanism, only naturalistic forces can be used to describe how such relationships can come about. (Queuing Jeopardy theme music)
37 posted on 12/02/2004 7:05:29 AM PST by Jehu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick

And don't forget we're still talking about physical evidence. If we're just evolved animals how come sex, alcohol, drugs, and all of Earth's vices don't satisfy the part of mankind we know as the soul. It seems there's something else besides the physical world we are so accustomed to experiencing.


38 posted on 12/02/2004 7:38:03 AM PST by kipita (Rebel – the proletariat response to Aristocracy and Exploitation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Reuben Hick
SETI is the sort of nonsense otherwise intelligent people create when they believe in falsehood. Evolutionary belief demands a frantic search for proof, any proof, that natural forces can assemble together the human mind, or the human eye (given enough time). All evolutionary arguments fall apart at the point where they have to explain the existence of the first atom, the first photon, the first cell, the first fish, the first idiot evolutionist that cannot see the forest for the trees. Romans describes these minds perfectly, in that they worship the creature and not the creator.

Imagine a group of people in a museum that exclaim and gasp over a great painting, theorizing how the paint was mixed, how the canvas was stretched, what the painting means, building great universities to explain the painting.

Yet all the while ignoring the painter who stands beside the painting waiting until they shut up so he can tell them all about it. Stupid darkened minds, most of them willingly so.
39 posted on 12/02/2004 8:10:38 AM PST by Jehu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Hey dummy, I am a Christian Minister.


Just because someone has a brain and doesn't believe nonsensical interpretations of the KJV Bible doesn't mean they aren't Christian.


I think you have crossed the line in judging lest ye be judged.


32 posted on 12/01/2004 7:23:24 PM MST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)

I sense a Christian love of your brothers and your enemies </sarcasm>

Someone may think you are a Christian Minister; but I'm sure Y'shua does not.
You are not a follower of the Christ as you do not obey the Word of G-d.


My L-rd, Y'shua commanded me to judge.

NAsbU John 7:24 "Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

His willing bondslave

chuck

40 posted on 12/02/2004 9:40:27 AM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Y'shua == YHvH is my Salvation (Psalm 118-14))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jehu

As a Dr. of Ministry, I think your assertion that there is not enough sin is ludicrous. I work in the inner city. There is still plenty of sin for Christ to die for.

Science never proves anything. The Theory of Evolution explains how life formed after creation of the first life on this planet.

There are over 100 observed speciations.


41 posted on 12/02/2004 12:25:54 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt

And I am sure Jesus will not know you when you get to the pearly gates. It will be like Bill Cosby's volkswagen backwards into the bay experience.

Xenia: "I believed in the heresy that the Bible was nonsense and the Ark contained all the species on earth 5000 years ago"

St.Peter: "You go to hell"


42 posted on 12/02/2004 12:35:20 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: shubi

I

pray,

 Abba, Father,

Creator of the universe,

send your Ruach haKodesh

to warm the heart of shubi

and remove the scales from his eyes

to your word as it is written.

I ask these things in the

Holy Name of Your Son

The Word of G-d:

Y’shua haMashiach

 

Bondslave to the Christ

chuck


43 posted on 12/02/2004 1:19:04 PM PST by Uri’el-2012 (Y'shua == YHvH is my Salvation (Psalm 118-14))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: XeniaSt

LOL, I pray that you will stop judging the salvation of others and leave it to God. I pray that you will stop trying to force people to believe nonsense by condemning them to hell. I pray that you will not end up in hell for heresy.


44 posted on 12/02/2004 2:05:25 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: shubi
My assertion is that sin came into the earth through one man, therefor it could be removed by ONE man. As a "Dr. of Ministry"? don't you even understand the premise of original sin? God does not disobey his own principles and laws.

He does not wave a magic wand over each person, over each sin in all minute details. God is scientific and redemption is more like an equation: Sin came into humanity through Adam. Sin can therefor be canceled for the WHOLE human race by one man...Christ. It is a matter of transference and substitution. If God was capricious He could just wave His hand and make all the bad go away.

If it was easy to cleanse us and the universe of sin do you think God would not have found another way than torturing and killing Himself in a human body? It is a very real thing...for anyone who believes, all your evil, every evil thought and act, all your hatred, bitterness, unforgivingness, lust, pride, insecurity goes onto Christ at that moment of time 2,000 years ago. Or you retain it yourself...and that Dr IS Hell.

This pertains to evolution in that if we descended from tribes of apes...then where and who did the original sin? From which line? Why are all sinners? Wouldn't some lines have stayed pure? If sin came from many sources, then Christ would have to address each source, He would have to have been crucified hundreds, even thousands, of times in human history. That did not happen. So evolution as proposed by current pseudoscience did not happen either.

Natural speciation has NEVER been observed...Gypsy Moths not withstanding. Any speciation that science says has taken place, did so by manipulation by man (who in this instance takes the role of the creator), or it is simply a labeling game, or the observation of variability within a species.

Also your statement: "Science never proves anything. The Theory of Evolution explains how life formed after creation of the first life on this planet."

Is in error, evolution, among other things, tries to describe the process whereby inanimate matter became the first living cell. Something that is mathematically impossible by natural forces alone.
45 posted on 12/02/2004 2:22:08 PM PST by Jehu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Jehu

I understand the theological construct of original sin, but I don't think an adapted pagan tale is definitive in understanding it.

I think the original sin IS our animal nature. Then God breathed His spirit into us and made us able to know Him.
Thus, evolution falls right into line with Genesis 1 and the Adam and Eve part tells us about the Spirit, which makes the difference between animals and Man.

The Bible is mostly concerned with spiritual instruction, not science.


46 posted on 12/02/2004 2:44:40 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: shubi
The Bible is not a compilation of "adapted pagan tales." Quite the reverse. All of your pagan tales have ridiculous exaggerations, a near fairy tale flavor. (Gilgamesh Epic for example)

The Biblical accounts are the REAL story, and are embedded in real human history, the people of the Bible actually existed. The pagan tales are the distorted word of mouth from generation to generation. I think your unbelief is apparent in your statement.

For myself I am quite confident that God has the power and foresight to make sure the REAL story was made available to man, to those that seek. To you the Bible appears to be just another account among many, half myth, half allegory.

Why even bother with believing in God if you faith is so half-assed? Why not just be another mediocre intellectual, preening and displaying your "superior intellect"? Why bother with all of this? Either God is who He says He is, or it is all a lie. Get off the fence my friend.
47 posted on 12/02/2004 3:02:27 PM PST by Jehu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Jehu

"The Bible is not a compilation of "adapted pagan tales." Quite the reverse. All of your pagan tales have ridiculous exaggerations, a near fairy tale flavor. (Gilgamesh Epic for example)"

There you go again! I didn't say the Bible is a compilation of adapted pagan tales. I said Adam and Eve were adapted from a know earlier pagan tale.

Why bother believing in God if you don't think he has enough power to create evolution?


48 posted on 12/02/2004 3:22:27 PM PST by shubi (Peace through superior firepower.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: shubi

Evolution and the Big bang are BS and not backed by any form of fact. The Big Bang can be proved wrong in a matter of seconds and evolution is not based on any real knowledge. A person that does not believe in JUNK science can still believe in God.


49 posted on 12/02/2004 4:16:19 PM PST by stockpirate (Check out my bio and learn about sKerry and his Socialist friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate; longshadow; VadeRetro; Junior; RadioAstronomer
The Big Bang can be proved wrong in a matter of seconds ...

I've got a few seconds to spare. If you've got the proof, I'd like to see it.

50 posted on 12/02/2004 4:33:51 PM PST by PatrickHenry (The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,001-1,048 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson