| Creation & Evolution Forum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too. |
 | | 
12th September 2006, 01:13 PM
|  | you are not reading this.
24    
| | Join Date: 18th February 2005 Location: Shah Alam, Selangor
Posts: 8,060
Blessings: 18,378 My Mood 
Reps: 15,461,686,232,085,960 (power: 15,461,686,232,100) | | - NS = only the strong survive
- GC = when I am weak, then am I strong
- NS = if you make it to the top, you make it
- GC = they that are first, shall be last, and the last shall be first
Now I've really figured out why the charismatics opposite college keep claiming Deuteronomy 28:13. They're evolutionists in disguise! "NS": If you make it to the top, you make it. AV1611VET says: they that are first, shall be last, and the last shall be first. The Bible says: And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath; if that thou hearken unto the commandments of the LORD thy God, which I command thee this day, to observe and to do them:
(Deuteronomy 28:13 KJV)
__________________ And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars?
- Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]
... to insist that the rising of the sun is figurative while the rising of the Son is literal is also hypocrisy.
- Geraldus Bouw,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
12th September 2006, 01:15 PM
|  | SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
57    
 | | Join Date: 18th June 2006 Location: United States
Posts: 2,126,165
Blessings: 2,934,947,701 My Mood 
Reps: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (power: 9,223,372,036,856,908) | |
Originally Posted by EnemyPartyII  *lol* just saw "If it disagrees with the King James Bible - it's wrong."
Wonder what the original Hebrew authors would make of that.
They are the ones that originally wrote:
[bible]Psalm 12:6-7[/bible]
And although, at the time, they didn't know it would eventually lead to the King James Bible --- it did.
__________________ GOD SAID IT -- THAT SETTLES IT
|
12th September 2006, 01:16 PM
| | Senior Veteran
43   
| | Join Date: 15th December 2004 Location: Kanagawa, Japan
Posts: 2,446
Blessings: 78,781
Reps: 6,155 (power: 16) | | Originally Posted by AV1611VET In the old days of debating evolution --- Christians used to say that evolution does not exist.
Scientists would counter that with examples like the Gypsy Moth changing colors on tree trunks.
To which the Christians would point out that that is not "evolution" per se --- that is "adaption".
So scientists 'broke' the term "evolution" into two separate terms: micro- and macro-.
This satisfied the Christians --- to a point.
Microevolution is adaption.
Macroevolution is evolution.
Microevolution, I believe, is also used to show one specific species within a genera giving rise to another species; but don't quote me on that.
I am not trying to be argumentative or condescending, but could you please post the source of where scientists created the terms microevolution and macroevolution?
__________________
"You know, they make fun of the ones who claimed earth was the center of the uiniverse. It is. It was, and it will be."--Dad
"If you want short, read my posts. I can sum it all up in three words: Evolution is a lie" JohnR7
|
12th September 2006, 01:16 PM
| | Legend
26   
| | Join Date: 12th September 2006
Posts: 15,520
Blessings: 1,069,585
Reps: 10,219,569,387,278,330 (power: 0) | | Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
Doesn't comply with predictions of entropy death...
Thanks for the clarification on micro/macro... but I have to say, if your gypsy moth population MICROevolves enough times, and another gypsy moth poulation stays statis... won't enough MICRO steps equal a MACRO step, that is to say that eventually the populations wont interbreed? |
12th September 2006, 01:20 PM
| | SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
57
| | Join Date: 18th June 2006 Location: United States
Posts: 2,126,165
Blessings: 2,934,947,701 My Mood
Reps: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (power: 9,223,372,036,856,908) | |
Originally Posted by rmwilliamsll Do you disagree?
yes.
you are searching an ancient document written to a specific people, culture and time and reading modern science back into it. No one reading or hearing these verses for the first time thought, imagined, dreamed anything like your interpretation. In fact, no one reading them for 2 millennium thought this is what they meant.
That is correct.
Same with some of the prophecies made. They made no sense at the time, but as time passed, things became clearer.
The book of Revelation is that way. It is "fuzzy" to us right now; but after the Rapture, and Tribulation starts, these things will become perfectly clear.
Genesis is creation --- in seed form.
__________________ GOD SAID IT -- THAT SETTLES IT
|
12th September 2006, 01:20 PM
| | Regular Member
29 
| | Join Date: 8th August 2006 Location: York, England
Posts: 145
Blessings: 82,120
Reps: 563 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by EnemyPartyII Thanks for the clarification on micro/macro... but I have to say, if your gypsy moth population MICROevolves enough times, and another gypsy moth poulation stays statis... won't enough MICRO steps equal a MACRO step, that is to say that eventually the populations wont interbreed?
There's a supernatural force that prevents it, apparently...
In direct conflict with the fossil and genetic evidence of course. |
12th September 2006, 01:21 PM
|  | avid reader
 
| | Join Date: 19th March 2004
Posts: 6,058
Blessings: 98,886
Reps: 9,718 (power: 23) | | | In the old days** of debating evolution --- Christians used to say that evolution does not exist.
The rise of modern fundamentalism and it's challenge to the TofE in the form of YECism is a modern movement. Fundamentalism itself dates no earlier than the 1920's,* even the precurser to modern YECism, the SDA Price is after 1930. From the time of Darwin to roughly 1910 and the rise of the counter-social gospel, counter-higher criticism, counter-TofE in fundamentalism essentially all Christians assented to the TofE. see, for example, Darwin's Forgotten Defenders. There are several good books on the rise of providential creationism and evolutionary creationism in that first and second generation of Christian following the publication of Darwin's Origin and it's near complete acceptance until the rise of fundamentalism. Which is why, outside of the US there is virtually no YECists, essentially are Christians there are TE.
notes:
* although some pieces of it such as dispensationalism and premillennialism date to the mid 19thC
** i suspect by "old days" this author thinks of the 1960's and books such as the Genesis Flood which was instrumental to the rise of modern YECism.
__________________
i got a warning for flaming.
i find myself unable to participate here as a result.
this being the first of it's kind since i signed into FidoNet 20 years ago.
and am no longer posting to CF.
thanks to everyone who i have encountered over the years i spent here.
|
12th September 2006, 01:23 PM
| | Veteran
  
| | Join Date: 2nd April 2006
Posts: 1,751
Blessings: 27,633
Reps: 28,202,083,625,285,816 (power: 28,202,083,625,292) | | Originally Posted by AV1611VET They are the ones that originally wrote:
[bible]Psalm 12:6-7[/bible]
And although, at the time, they didn't know it would eventually lead to the King James Bible --- it did.
Dont make me explain this verse to you again, and how it doesn't back up what you are claiming it does. |
12th September 2006, 01:26 PM
| | SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
57
| | Join Date: 18th June 2006 Location: United States
Posts: 2,126,165
Blessings: 2,934,947,701 My Mood
Reps: 9,223,372,036,854,775,808 (power: 9,223,372,036,856,908) | |
Originally Posted by BeamMeUpScotty I am not trying to be argumentative or condescending, but could you please post the source of where scientists created the terms microevolution and macroevolution?
Nope --- don't know where it's at --- sorry.
__________________ GOD SAID IT -- THAT SETTLES IT
|
12th September 2006, 01:35 PM
| | avid reader
| | Join Date: 19th March 2004
Posts: 6,058
Blessings: 98,886
Reps: 9,718 (power: 23) | | Originally Posted by AV1611VET That is correct.
Same with some of the prophecies made. They made no sense at the time, but as time passed, things became clearer.
The book of Revelation is that way. It is "fuzzy" to us right now; but after the Rapture, and Tribulation starts, these things will become perfectly clear.
Genesis is creation --- in seed form.
like YECism, the rapture and tribulation are the providence of just a fraction of the greater Christian community. Once again the inability of some people to separate their own interpretation of the Scriptures from the text itself and seemingly to believe that all Christians believe that the text teaches their specific group's interpretation.
although fuzzy is the right word to describe Revelation.
__________________
i got a warning for flaming.
i find myself unable to participate here as a result.
this being the first of it's kind since i signed into FidoNet 20 years ago.
and am no longer posting to CF.
thanks to everyone who i have encountered over the years i spent here.
| | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
