Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
While it is true that we human "civilization" (as is usually defined), goes back to around 5,000 b.c. or so, that does not mean that is the limit of evidence we have about the humans living on earth. That is just when they formed up into groups large enough to meet the qualification of "civilization". We have a solid record of evidence of human activity and groups going back tens of thousands of years. We know roughly how many folks lived in Europe, for example before and during the last ice age, how they lived, what they ate, a bit about their social structure and we have their artwork.
A great book called "After the Ice" chronicles the various population groups around the world from the last ice age (about 20,000 years ago) up to the the first "civilizations".
Now, what I do not find surprising at all is that the Bible has genealogies going back just about as long as actual "civilizations" have been around. That would make a lot of sense. But that was not at all the beginnings of our evidence for humanity. Our knowledge of humanity in, say, 10,000 b.c. is very detailed and rich.
As for the "ape-like" fossils, what is interesting is that we have a progression of fossils. Starting from very ape-like, but NOT apes, since they have some features that only modern humans have today, all the way to very human-like, but NOT human, since they have features that only apes have today. And a steady progression of this transition in between. What I find very interesting is that the creationist scientists like to say that the fossils we have are all clearly either ape or human. BUT, there are some fossils that are such a mix of features that the creation scientists themselves disagree over whether they are ape or human!
__________________ In matters that are obscure and far beyond our vision, even in such as we may find treated in Holy Scripture, different Interpretations are sometimes possible without prejudice to the faith we have received. - St. Augustine, in his analysis of Genesis.
While it is true that we human "civilization" (as is usually defined), goes back to around 5,000 b.c. or so, that does not mean that is the limit of evidence we have about the humans living on earth. That is just when they formed up into groups large enough to meet the qualification of "civilization". We have a solid record of evidence of human activity and groups going back tens of thousands of years. We know roughly how many folks lived in Europe, for example before and during the last ice age, how they lived, what they ate, a bit about their social structure and we have their artwork.
A great book called "After the Ice" chronicles the various population groups around the world from the last ice age (about 20,000 years ago) up to the the first "civilizations".
Now, what I do not find surprising at all is that the Bible has genealogies going back just about as long as actual "civilizations" have been around. That would make a lot of sense. But that was not at all the beginnings of our evidence for humanity. Our knowledge of humanity in, say, 10,000 b.c. is very detailed and rich.
As for the "ape-like" fossils, what is interesting is that we have a progression of fossils. Starting from very ape-like, but NOT apes, since they have some features that only modern humans have today, all the way to very human-like, but NOT human, since they have features that only apes have today. And a steady progression of this transition in between. What I find very interesting is that the creationist scientists like to say that the fossils we have are all clearly either ape or human. BUT, there are some fossils that are such a mix of features that the creation scientists themselves disagree over whether they are ape or human!
I have no problem with what you’re saying; especially carbon dating has put a lot of light on this subject. Creationist would have nothing; if it was not for evolutionist; because they would of never addressed the creative world until their dogma was challenged. Ill I still believe God is the creator of all things; I just do not limit it with time.
What I mean is Genesis is the foundation, the beginning of the Bible; it was divinely written by men inspired by God’s Spirit. So if you have some doctrine, creed or idealism and you cannot glean the example in Genesis; then it is error.
Interesting. So you are saying if there is no reference to the virgin birth of Christ in Genesis, that doctrine is in error. btw, is there a reference to the virgin birth in Genesis? I haven't checked, but none comes to mind off the top of my head.
If you want to correct me thank you, but common names start a capital letter. [/size]
True, but forum usernames often don't. Like mine. I usually spell it gluadys, not Gluadys. I copied his usage.
Besides I do not waist my time reading about some long dead church members opinion; God’s Word is progressive.
He's not dead. Unless it is his ghost making the posts.
Do you have a problem with even looking at something anyone other than yourself has to say?
__________________ The high, the low, all of creation God gives to humankind to use. If this privilege is misused, God's Justice permits creation to punish humanity~~ Hildegard of Bingen cited in, Earth Prayers from around the World
Interesting. So you are saying if there is no reference to the virgin birth of Christ in Genesis, that doctrine is in error. btw, is there a reference to the virgin birth in Genesis? I haven't checked, but none comes to mind off the top of my head.
True, but forum usernames often don't. Like mine. I usually spell it gluadys, not Gluadys. I copied his usage.
He's not dead. Unless it is his ghost making the posts.
Do you have a problem with even looking at something anyone other than yourself has to say?
That is so easy reference the virgin birth; the first Adam was created by God and was not defiled by man’s flesh; that is about as virgin as you can get. I do not look for truth in the Babylonian harlot church system; I look for God’s anointing. You see there are two kinds of anointing those who come from God Spirit and those who come from religion.
He may not be dead physically; but he is dead.
I believe in God’s anointing; in reference to who I am led to follow; I mean David had an anointing and so did Saul; I follow David’s anointing.
My wife is Methodist and we do share many deep things in God; she jokes that all I ever read are staple. You see the men of God I follow do not sell God’s Word; they freely give it away and quite often the message maybe ten or eleven pages stapled together. .
I believe there is a real spiritual Church; I also believe there are also carnal churches, intercultural churches, and intellectual churches and the list goes on. God is a spirit not a brain. BUT what does the Bible say how God choices his anointed?
David was king; He was God’s anointed King; not like Saul who was also anointed by God; but chosen by the people; like many ministries in the church (little c) realm today. David was one of those special people God called, anointed and was anointed as child. Today’s ministry is chosen by men. I have found men of God that I know anointed by the deepness of their understanding not because they have been voted in or out by some church committee. David walked for many years and knew He had an anointing; but he kept it to himself and understood that Saul was God’s anointed; that is until the appointed time. I think we are better off to wait for God to anoint God’s chosen vessel then to anoint our own. Also let us not forget Solomon who was also anointed of God; but because of his marring and turning his heart to false idols he became corrupt. Reminds me of all the different religions out there that man has married into; there is only one way; Christ with in.
I mean, deliberate distortions of science, quote-mining, no actual original research, misdirection and misunderstanding of science, utter disregard for scientific method, misleading biblical interpretation etc etc etc...
__________________ "Call some place paradise/Kiss it goodbye"
The Eagles, the Last Resort
Liberal Christians do it in context
"Literalism is the first line of defense of a mind that wants to put itself to sleep." Walter A Davis
Going back to the "origins" of this thread, I would have to enter in by stating that based on my very limited understanding of Scripture, then I must qualify myself as a Young Earth Creationist. I truly believe that Creation occured in 6 literal days as stated in Genesis. I base this on the belief that Scripture is the inerrant Word of the one true and living God Yehweh. I believe God created the earth as it is.
Reading these posts, I see many people talking about evidence, however, I do not see them providing any evidence for any belief. My only evidence is simply what Scripture says.
Being able to think, I allow that everyone has the right to believe whatever they want to believe. However, I was not there when God laid the foundation of the Universe. I do not know when or how He did it. I do know that He did it. I know that the "Big Bang" theory is false. That I can prove scientifically. Just try blowing up a forest and see if a house will be standing there when the dust settles. That is the kind of logic that is needed to believe in the "Big Bang" theory. Also, I know that "evolution" as in macroevolution, or everthing evolved from a common ancestor, is also false, and can be disproved scientifically. Evolution can only be based on genetic mutation. Even today, genetic mutation occurs. However, when these mutations occur, they are either unable to reproduce or are disabled, not improved.
Linear Mode
