You:
It’s sad that you don’t recognize your definition of “kind” as a textbook example of the logical fallacy known as begging the question.
***********************************************************
It is sad for our future that evolutionists ram the false worldview of common descent down the collective throats of our children without a shred of scientific evidence to support it.
**********************
The ToE and Christian faith coexist perfectly.
***********************************************************
That sounds like theistic evolutionism, which is a logical fallacy. Have you never read these verses?
“Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,” — Mat 19:4 KJV
“But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.” — Mar 10:6 KJV
**********************
It is not blasphemous to fully subscribe to a divinely created universe, yet recognize that that which our senses perceive is merely the part that God chooses to reveal.”
***********************************************************
God told us how he did it. He also told us that, from the beginning, Satan sought to convince mankind to doubt the Word of God. Satan is, after all, the great deceiver.
Almost forgot. Satan is also a murderer and the father of lies (John 8:44).
**********************
We can study that part, measure it, theorize about it, and learn not only about what we see, but about God himself.
***********************************************************
Why not simply take God at his Word? When God said he created the stars on the 4th day, the day after he created the plants, why doubt him? Is that less scientifically tenable than the universe magically appearing out of nothing, or stars being created by exploding stars, the first of which magically appeared?
**********************
Blind adherence to creationism in the face of real scientific observation is rationalization, not science. It is practiced by those of weak faith.”
***********************************************************
Surely you jest. What “scientific observation” are you referring to? Are you referring to the scientific observation that plants and animals never “stray”, not even in the fossil record, from their respective kinds, or families, or types, or whatever label you choose to assign them? That the fossil record shows abrupt appearance and then stasis, and disparity before diversity, both of which falsify common descent? That the layers in the geological column shows an almost universal lack of erosion and bioturbation, and that most layers contain marine fossils, even in the highest layers and highest mountain ranges? Or that mountain ranges are covered with folded, not cracked, sedimentary layers denoting the mountain ranges formed while the sediment was still pliable? What “scientific observation” are you referring to?
Frankly, I don’t have enough faith to believe what you believe. I don’t believe in magic.
**********************
God gave us the capacity to learn. We should use it
***********************************************************
Perhaps you should.
Mr. Kalamata
I, as a Christian, have the utmost respect for the faithful who adhere to the literal truth of the Bible.
I have none for those of little faith who choose to rationalize Biblical verse via creationism.
You are among the latter.
One last question: if creationism is science, what findings might you accept as falsification of creation? As you know, falsification is a key element of the scientific method.
God's Word says not one word about science as we understand it.
Kalamata: "When God said he created the stars on the 4th day, the day after he created the plants, why doubt him?
Is that less scientifically tenable than the universe magically appearing out of nothing, or stars being created by exploding stars, the first of which magically appeared?"
Sure, it's hypothetically possible that God created plants somewhere before He created the stars we can see, but so far we've found no evidence of it.
That puts such ideas in the realm of scientific speculation.
As for the so-called Big Bang, nobody assumes it was "magical" and science has no serious explanation for it.
It remains, and will remain, the willing Act of our Creator.