Posted on 04/12/2016 7:52:06 AM PDT by fishtank
Yet another old-earther accuses a creationist of believing in evolution
by Nick Sabato
Published: 12 April 2016 (GMT+10)
On a 28 March 2016 blog post, Professor Ken Keathley made the allegation that Ken Ham now embraces evolution. He bases this unfounded assertion on a recent article where Ham discusses how the diversity of species present today can be traced back to their respective “kinds” represented on the Ark. For Keathley, it is “big news” that a prominent creationist “has embraced macro-evolution.” However, as will be seen, creationists in general embraced speciation for decades; it is not just a property of evolutionists.
First, the article in question has done no such thing, and secondly, variation within a kind is not “big news”, nor is it “macro-evolution”.
The same day that this fallacious post appeared, CMI’s Calvin Smith (and others) rebutted Keathley’s assertions in the comments section and pointed out his equivocation of speciation and evolution. And they further pointed out that his ‘micro-macro’ distinction is an example of ‘Arguments we think creationists should not use’, because the issue is not size of change but direction (informationally uphill or downhill).
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
I thought you were watching them...
Exactly ... Some of the smartest people I know are also the dumbest people I know.
I’ve tuned in to Ken Ham’s message for many years, and I am unfamiliar with him stating categorically that people who don’t believe in six literal days of creation are not Christians. I would think his position was more that they were in error, but certainly may well be Christians in spite of their error. Being he is reformed in his soteriology (IIRC), he would be unlikely to reduce salvation to a pop quiz. Do you have a specific quote in mind?
Peace,
SR
Will you grant me one of the commonest definitions of speciation?
Creatures that can’t breed together are members of different species. Will you agree to that much?
Ken Ham doesn’t really know what he believes, but rapid speciation post-Noah has no evidence for it in the fossil record. Once again, the young earth cult runs into the wall.
I heard him say it in the Ham vs. Ross debates. Don’t have the quote right here, but could probably dig it up. Ken Ham ought to repent for his arrogance.
rapid speciation post-Noah has no evidence for it in the fossil record. Once again, the young earth cult runs into the wall.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Cult” is a very strong word, a little harsh for people who might have a slight misunderstanding of literal translations of Biblical scripture.
Also, a hypothesized postdiluvian rapid speciation is not affected by the fossil record. The explanation would be that the geological time scale has not been interpreted correctly and that strata were laid down by the Flood and thus the fossil record actually supports the Flood story.
And before you feel the need to do it, please don’t jump down my throat, I’m not a YEC.
You posted: “according to some Torah scholars, the first seven...“days” of the Creation are more like eras.” makes sense to me and is, in one sense, the writers of the Old Testament ‘speaking metaphorically’ which I’ve seen many ‘creationists’ here in FR say that to say so is NOT to believe the Bible or in Jesus, because Jesus believed in 7 earth 24 hour days to create the world.
And that, to me, God may have very well tried many experiments until he created Adam with a soul.
Cheers, G-F
Thanks for the ping. I agree that the seven “days” of Genesis were not 24 hours long.
The scientist was going to prove to God that he could create life. God say “Okay - let’s both do it and have a race!”
God picks up a handful of dirt.
The scientist picks up his handful of dirt.
God looks over and exclaims “HEY! Get your own dirt!”
What I find interesting is how the Genesis account fits in fairly well with our current THEORIES of how the universe got started with a “Big Bang”. Nothing (”out of the void”, then a burst of energy (”let there be light”), etc. (The first “light” being perhaps some revealed understanding of energy, as the sun wasn’t created until later.)
Anyway, it is a lot different than a lot of the other creation stories with the Sun traveling on a turtle, etc.
It was a debate with Ken Ham on you tube with Hugh Ross. Sorry there are several online, I don’t recall which one..
“sun traveling on turtle” — Man saw turtle with sun on it. stops turtle. Flips it on its back adds water and vegetables. Sun cook turtle in its shell resulting in the first turtle soup and the sun thus stopped in it current location.
You would have God actually speak a metaphor (lie, really) with His own voice, and subsequently write it with His own finger in stone (twice!)? Is the length of a day in verse 9 different than the length of the day in verse 11?
God may have very well tried many experiments until he created Adam with a soul.
So your god needed experimentation to determine the best working model of a human? The God I worship is omniscient, and is the truth, He certainly does not need to seek truth out through trivial human scientific means.
Have you thought through the ramifications of your belief system? If you don't claim to be a Christian, so be it. But, if you claim to be born again, you are apparently looking to Dawkins for your theology, not the Bible.
Moses: Deut 19:2-4 2And Moses called unto all Israel, and said unto them, Ye have seen all that the LORD did before your eyes in the land of Egypt unto Pharaoh, and unto all his servants, and unto all his land; 3The great temptations which thine eyes have seen, the signs, and those great miracles: 4Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.
Jesus: John 5: 39-40, 46-47 39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. 46For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
Jesus: Luke 16: 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
Jesus, regarding the Pharisees, the 30 AD experts on the Torah: Matthew 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
No. Milk snakes, corn snakes and king snakes are different species, but can and do breed into hybrids.
Are the offspring fertile?
Very much so, very pretty, vetive.ry lucr
Very lucrative. Gotta love typos on a phone.
Indeed!
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.