Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Theology (Christians Only) > Theology (Christian Only) > General Theology > Origins Theology
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Calendar Mark Forums Read

Origins Theology Forum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 23rd June 2009, 08:10 PM
Mallon's Avatar
Senior Veteran

29 Gender: Male Faith: Lutheran Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 6th March 2006
Posts: 6,088
Blessings: 53,547
Reps: 18,889,155,825,852,136 (power: 18,889,155,825,864)
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by sawdust View Post
You simply missed the point. We don't have to answer any of the questions you asked. We are given enough information in the scripture to recognise there are different kinds and that each of these different kinds were created by God fully formed.
I'm not so sure I did miss the point.
As I said, if "kinds" are real, discrete groupings within nature, then distinguishing them from one another should be a trivial matter. And if they are static through time, as you imply, then telling them apart as we progress through the fossil record should likewise be simple.
But it's not. What you call discrete "kinds" today look less and less discrete as we look further back into the fossil record. Humans and chimps may look very different today, but the line gets blurrier and blurrier as we trace our lineages back in the fossil record:

Thus, it seems that "kinds" are not real, discrete groupings, and that the use of the word "kind" in the Bible is in a phenomenological sense, and not a scientific one.

And no, I'm not trying to read evolution into Genesis. That's the whole point of recognizing phenomenological language.
__________________
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #52  
Old 23rd June 2009, 08:14 PM
Mallon's Avatar
Senior Veteran

29 Gender: Male Faith: Lutheran Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 6th March 2006
Posts: 6,088
Blessings: 53,547
Reps: 18,889,155,825,852,136 (power: 18,889,155,825,864)
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Calypsis4 View Post
If evolution were true then it should be an easy matter of revealing how organisms can change into other organisms by sexual cross bredding of similar kinds. Alas, man cannot do this with any kind of ape successfully even though evolutionists tell us that apes and man have a common ancestor with them. It's all nonsense.
Have you ever heard of ring species? They completely undermine this point.

The truth is that they have a common Creator and not a common ancestor.
"Common creator" doesn't explain the nested hierarchical pattern into which life is organized. Only common ancestry accounts for that pattern.
__________________
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood

Last edited by Mallon; 23rd June 2009 at 08:29 PM.
  #53  
Old 23rd June 2009, 09:47 PM
juvenissun's Avatar
Veteran

59 Gender: Male Married Faith: Baptist Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,546
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568)
juvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond repute
juvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Mallon View Post
I'm not so sure I did miss the point.
As I said, if "kinds" are real, discrete groupings within nature, then distinguishing them from one another should be a trivial matter. And if they are static through time, as you imply, then telling them apart as we progress through the fossil record should likewise be simple.
But it's not. What you call discrete "kinds" today look less and less discrete as we look further back into the fossil record. Humans and chimps may look very different today, but the line gets blurrier and blurrier as we trace our lineages back in the fossil record:

Thus, it seems that "kinds" are not real, discrete groupings, and that the use of the word "kind" in the Bible is in a phenomenological sense, and not a scientific one.

And no, I'm not trying to read evolution into Genesis. That's the whole point of recognizing phenomenological language.
Put the flesh on this bones and watch their appearances and behaviors, then a 3-year-old will know what the "kind" means. There may be some mixed-ups over the boundaries, but it does not really matter. The main point is that we do not mix mankind with animal-kind.

I said you are brain-washed by paleontology, you don't believe it. Like the first question I talked to you two years ago, if you give my body hair (fur?) back, then I would probably reconsider the relationship between mankind and ape-kind.
  #54  
Old 23rd June 2009, 10:56 PM
gluadys's Avatar
Legend

Gender: Female Faith: Protestant Party: CA-NDP Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 2nd March 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,850
Blessings: 61,126
Reps: 12,567,898,174,147,644 (power: 12,567,898,174,166)
gluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond repute
gluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond reputegluadys has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Calypsis4 View Post
If evolution were true then it should be an easy matter of revealing how organisms can change into other organisms by sexual cross bredding of similar kinds. Alas, man cannot do this with any kind of ape successfully even though evolutionists tell us that apes and man have a common ancestor with them. It's all nonsense. The truth is that they have a common Creator and not a common ancestor.
Problem is that evolutionary theory doesn't say that we get all or even most new species by cross-breeding. It says we get many new species by separating a single species into different lines of descendants.

That is why it speaks of common ancestors.

A tigon or a liger does not have a common ancestor. It has two different ancestors.

Furthermore, that new species come about by splitting a single species is not an untested idea. This is observed in nature and in controlled experiments.
__________________
"Either we've got to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy - and then admit that we just don't wanna do it." Steve Colbert
  #55  
Old 24th June 2009, 12:17 AM
Mallon's Avatar
Senior Veteran

29 Gender: Male Faith: Lutheran Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 6th March 2006
Posts: 6,088
Blessings: 53,547
Reps: 18,889,155,825,852,136 (power: 18,889,155,825,864)
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by juvenissun View Post
I said you are brain-washed by paleontology, you don't believe it.
Brainwashed people have no intelligent thoughts of their own to offer because they've spent little time thinking critically about the issues, so they resort to attacking others by accusing them of being brainwashed.

Like the first question I talked to you two years ago, if you give my body hair (fur?) back, then I would probably reconsider the relationship between mankind and ape-kind.



Now here come the excuses/backtracking/goalpost-moving!
__________________
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood
  #56  
Old 24th June 2009, 02:24 PM
juvenissun's Avatar
Veteran

59 Gender: Male Married Faith: Baptist Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,546
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568)
juvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond repute
juvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond repute
[quote=Mallon;52169844]
Brainwashed people have no intelligent thoughts of their own to offer because they've spent little time thinking critically about the issues, so they resort to attacking others by accusing them of being brainwashed.
Very wrong. Brainwashed people can think perfectly. But the whole thinking is biased and confined.




Now here come the excuses/backtracking/goalpost-moving!
As a geologist, I love and I also hate exception. For this one, I love to know what happened to them. And I hate people who use them for any general argument. It is not math or physics. Three exceptions are nothing while you have millions of samples.
  #57  
Old 24th June 2009, 02:25 PM
Mallon's Avatar
Senior Veteran

29 Gender: Male Faith: Lutheran Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 6th March 2006
Posts: 6,088
Blessings: 53,547
Reps: 18,889,155,825,852,136 (power: 18,889,155,825,864)
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Who called it?
__________________
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood
  #58  
Old 24th June 2009, 02:35 PM
juvenissun's Avatar
Veteran

59 Gender: Male Married Faith: Baptist Member For 4 Years
 
Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,546
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568)
juvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond repute
juvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond reputejuvenissun has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Mallon View Post

Now here come the excuses/backtracking/goalpost-moving!
Take this one as an example. When this person stood side by side with a chimp/ape/..., I think a 3-year-old can STILL tell who is human and who is not.
Think: if both were presented as skeletons, then even me WILL have trouble to tell who is who.

You tell me why.

(my idea: when we only compare bones, A LOT of information about the life is missing. That is probably one of the most significant problem with paleontology and anthropology.)
  #59  
Old 24th June 2009, 02:43 PM
Mallon's Avatar
Senior Veteran

29 Gender: Male Faith: Lutheran Country: Canada Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 6th March 2006
Posts: 6,088
Blessings: 53,547
Reps: 18,889,155,825,852,136 (power: 18,889,155,825,864)
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Mallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond reputeMallon has a reputation beyond repute
Keep shifting those goalposts, juvie. You're doing a fine job.
__________________
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood
  #60  
Old 24th June 2009, 07:30 PM
sawdust's Avatar
redeemed waste

55 Gender: Female Married Faith: Christian Country: Australia Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 9th January 2004
Location: Darwin, Australia
Posts: 1,806
Blessings: 45,273
Reps: 2,568,795,385,755,541 (power: 2,568,795,385,765)
sawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond repute
sawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond reputesawdust has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Mallon View Post
I'm not so sure I did miss the point.
As I said, if "kinds" are real, discrete groupings within nature, then distinguishing them from one another should be a trivial matter. And if they are static through time, as you imply, then telling them apart as we progress through the fossil record should likewise be simple.
But it's not. What you call discrete "kinds" today look less and less discrete as we look further back into the fossil record. Humans and chimps may look very different today, but the line gets blurrier and blurrier as we trace our lineages back in the fossil record:

Thus, it seems that "kinds" are not real, discrete groupings, and that the use of the word "kind" in the Bible is in a phenomenological sense, and not a scientific one.

And no, I'm not trying to read evolution into Genesis. That's the whole point of recognizing phenomenological language.
The problem is you're looking at fossils that more than likely have no bearing whatsoever on this current creation.

The scriptures teach past creations as well as future creations. As long as that fact remains unrecognised, science will continue to look at the earth as one long history and continue to make the same old mistakes (of interpretation).

And I didn't imply "kinds" were static except within the particular "kind" because that is what the scriptures teach. How much variation within a kind is possible? I have no idea. I didn't design the specifications.

You say you didn't miss the point and yet you continue to place your "observations" over and above what the word of God teaches. Learn what the word teaches first, then what we observe in the natural order will have a very different understanding.

peace
Closed Thread

Tags
brain, evolution, human, plastic, science


Return to Origins Theology

Thread Tools
Display Modes


 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:41 AM.