Creationists False on Key Point

[Ronald]

Which begs the question, Why did God then create the Sun and Moon on the third day? According to the explanation above, neither Sun nor Moon were needed.

Just to mess with guys like you. His light was sufficient for a couple days. We don't see His light now nor can any thing be in His presence without burning up - in the physical realm that is. He had to reveal Himself behind a cloud to Moses. So just wasn't His plan to suspend Himself in the sky for thousands of years for all to see. Could you imagine, then everyone would believe, even Darwin would not have come up with his concoction. The Bible would read differently then wouldn't it. The part where it says "faith comes by the word of God" would read, "faith comes by looking up in the sky" We'd just get our telescopes out and there He'd be, "Hey look, He's waving at us!" Hi Jesus , come on down and sup with us. "Sorry, I have to stay up here and illuminate the planet, it's boring but_ ya know_ someone's gotta do it! Besides, it is much better this way, He is everywhere. Someday we will be with Him face to face -- soon!

 

[Ronald]

Creationists assume that at some time in the not so distant past, Christianity was all-powerful in society. Then Charles Darwin dethroned it

Nope, Christianity has grown and is right on track with God's plan. No fool or anyone or group of people or nation could dethrone Christianity. I don't know where you heard that? After 150 years of Darwinism being shoved down our throats only 10% of the worlds population believe it. But it seems the percentages in America have dropped. This is do to liberalism, and drifting away from God. It's not really Darwin, it's people want to be on there own throne and director of their own destiny. They rebel against authority, constraints, so now you have moral relativism spreading. People want to be free to do whatever they want like gays getting married or aborting babies at anytime. Drugs , booze, foul language, sex and money. Sin is the culprit behind all of it. Darwin did do some damage though -- but that all was factored into the Plan.
Between 1700 and 1740, an estimated 75-80% of the population attended churches, which were being built at a headlong pace.
The following site shows the growth of Christianity throughout the centuries. By 1900, there were 500 million Christians in the world, and now 2.3 billion. That almost 1/3 of the planet, that's the remnant who are supposed be spared during Judgment Day. We're just about there.
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txx/numberch.htm

 

[Speedwell]

Nope, Christianity has grown and is right on track with God's plan. No fool or anyone or group of people or nation could dethrone Christianity. I don't know where you heard that? After 150 years of Darwinism being shoved down our throats only 10% of the worlds population believe it.

You think that 90% of the world's population believes that the universe was created 6000 years ago? That there was a flood which covered the entire terrestrial globe 4500 years ago? What have you been smoking?

The following site shows the growth of Christianity throughout the centuries. By 1900, there were 500 million Christians in the world, and now 2.3 billion. That almost 1/3 of the planet, that's the remnant who are supposed be spared during Judgment Day. We're just about there.

You realize, I hope, that the majority of those Christians are believers whose faith you people deny--mainstream Protestants, Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Copts, Syriacs, Chaldeans, Thomas Christians and other Orthodox and Oriental churches too numerous to mention. You are on the fringe, both in numbers and in doctrine.

 

[miamited]

Hi speedwell,

Just wanted to add my thoughts about something you responded to ronald about. You responded:

You are on the fringe, both in numbers and in doctrine.

I can't speak for ronald and his understanding, but...

I'm always cautious when I get responses from others that what I believe or what I think about the things of God is in line with the majority of some group. There are a couple of reasons for that. First, Jesus spoke of there being a narrow way and that there would be few who find it. Secondly, even among those who attach themselves to the name 'christian', Jesus seems to have made clear that many of them will be turned away.

So, when someone tells me that what I believe or what I think about the things of God is in line with the general understanding of others, I imagine that I'm likely wrong. Of course, this isn't a hard and fast rule, but does cause me to tread cautiously. I rather imagine that being on the fringe is often exactly where I need to be regarding the things of God.

Looking at the example of Jesus in Israel, the Scriptures seem to show that in that day, even among the people of God, there were very, very few among the millions of Jews who were supposed to be God's people raised up by God to do His bidding, who believed him. In fact, the Scriptures don't seem to indicate that any of the people who were gathered for his trial, stood up for his cause.

So, there seem to be several examples throughout the Scriptures, that the faithful of God will always be few in number at any given time upon the earth. Of course, the multitude of which no could number spoken of in the Revelation would be all the believers since the beginning, about 6,000 years ago and I imagine that will be a great multitude.

Just my thoughts.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Archie the Preacher]

You think that 90% of the world's population believes that the universe was created 6000 years ago? That there was a flood which covered the entire terrestrial globe 4500 years ago? What have you been smoking?

Speedwell, as much as I seem to agree with you regarding the origin of the Universe, I must object on logical grounds. Majority opinion does not control reality.

One notes for many years - centuries - the majority of humanity favored the view of some form of deity 'magicking' 'the world' (Universe) into existance; not all assuming the same deity. Currently, a great majority of humanity do not accept the idea of the Creator God of the Judeo-Christian tradition or even a 'personal' god of any form.

Human opinion can be so fickle.

 

[Speedwell]

Speedwell, as much as I seem to agree with you regarding the origin of the Universe, I must object on logical grounds. Majority opinion does not control reality.

One notes for many years - centuries - the majority of humanity favored the view of some form of deity 'magicking' 'the world' (Universe) into existance; not all assuming the same deity. Currently, a great majority of humanity do not accept the idea of the Creator God of the Judeo-Christian tradition or even a 'personal' god of any form.

Human opinion can be so fickle.

I wasn't arguing for the correctness of the majority view, but with the so-called fact presented: that only ten percent of the world population believes in "Darwinism."

Actually, nobody believes in "Darwinism" except the Creationists. It's their straw man, after all.

 

[Ronald]

You think that 90% of the world's population believes that the universe was created 6000 years ago? That there was a flood which covered the entire terrestrial globe 4500 years ago? What have you been smoking?

Didn't say that, just 90% believe in God, but I guess that is irrelevant, since unless you believe in Jesus, it doesn't matter. My point was for perspective, that only 9-10% on the planet are atheists. I know it wasn't a regional flood like some presume. You aren't required to accept the specifics of the origins to believe in Jesus. But if you like science and math, just do the math. Start with two people and multiply let's say four kids per couple x 100 generations. We'll just limit reproduction to age 40 and call it a generation. They started young back then, say on the average of 18 years old when they got married. By the time the first couple is 45, all their children are starting to reproduce their own families. Yes, back then, incest was acceptable and permitted because their genetic makeup descended from perfect beings and so did not have the defects in the code until dozens of generations later. They figured that out the birth defect cause, so forbid marriage between close relatives, but by then, there were millions in the pool to choose from. I came up with 10 billion people. Since there is only 7.2 billion, we have to account for infant mortality rate, disease, plagues and some people not having kids. 4300 of so years produced 7.2 billion. Smoke and inhale some of that for awhile - you might reach a high?

You realize, I hope, that the majority of those Christians are believers whose faith you people deny--mainstream Protestants, Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Copts, Syriacs, Chaldeans, Thomas Christians and other Orthodox and Oriental churches too numerous to mention. You are on the fringe, both in numbers and in doctrine.

I don't deny anyone who believes in Jesus, whether they are Catholic, or any denomination or non-denominational. I am just repeating sound doctrine laid down by Jesus himself. He said He was the only way, so all other religions, philosophies, atheism are deceived and lost.

 

[Razare]

Who you pick fights with is irrelevant if we care about the truth.

The false idea here is that we are preaching Christianity, which is the gospel of Jesus Christ, by the persuasiveness and power of men as orators, and by our own cleverness to convince people.

If this is so, then we should abandon the faith of Christianity because it is a false religion. Rather Paul said:

My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, - 1 Corinthians 2:4

O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” - 1 Timothy 6:20

Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. - Colossians 2:8

What is science itself?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

It's philosophy. Philosophy is a set of axioms believed, and then upon which, you build reasoning. But the axioms of science in themselves are "according to the basic principles of the world" and not according to Christ who created and exists forever above the principles of this world.

So science is like a neat little toy, and people can have jobs with it. I am an accountant, and God condones it. But if I go turning my accounting into the philosophy of how to live my life, I am greatly sinning and it's wrong and evil.

Likewise, if science is the vehicle to arrive at truth, then you errored by Colossians 2:8. You are following a philosophy and not Christ. Christ is not a philosophy but a life with power, and a word of truth with miracles following.

Also in Noah's day, he cared about truth and he was the only man who did, along with his family. The rest of the world perished. Many back then could have said, "You're barking up the wrong tree, Noah." "Why preach that way Noah? It doesn't help your cause, it hurts it! Be more like us! Believe what we believe, then we will listen."

But the test for truth is not whether we are "picking the wrong fight". The test for truth, is Jesus Christ who is truth. And as Paul stated, the apostle to the gentiles, hand picked by the resurrected Jesus Christ himself, Paul states that philosophy according to the basic principles of this world, is an enemy of Christ, not acceptance of Christ.

 

[Smidlee]

Okay, I really, really want to hear the rest of that. What scripture (section?) shows God using something pre-existant to create the universe?

Gladly.
Hebrews 11:3 "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. (note it doesn't say made out of nothing)
John 1:1,3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Ephesians 3:9 " .... who created all things by Jesus Christ."
Jesus Christ is not nothing.
Wouldn't it be something to find out that God already told us EXACTLY how He created the universe.

Please show something to reasonably believe your statement in the second sentence of this paragraph. For that matter, how does Fr. Lemaitre's idea refute itself? How is the theory self-contradictory?

Boltzmann Brain paradox. Eternal inflammation which Big bang needs which makes it more likely a small universe comes from the singularity than a huge fine-tuned Universe. It's a lot more likely to produce a Boltzmann Brain which simulates a universe since it's would be minimum requirement than to create a real universe with brains in real bodies. Since a simulated universe is more likely this would refute the very science it based on. Science in it's final conclusion refutes itself.

Of course some people cheats by trying to have God tied up with duck tape over his mouth and only allow him speak to to avoid these paradoxes produced by man's science.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

I wasn't arguing for the correctness of the majority view, but with the so-called fact presented: that only ten percent of the world population believes in "Darwinism."

Actually, nobody believes in "Darwinism" except the Creationists. It's their straw man, after all.

Point taken. I agree, if we're basing 'truth' on popular opinion or 'votes'. the YEC view is clearly losing.

I'm waiting for it to fade away and die, in the same manner as 'flat earth', 'terra-centric solar systems' and such.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Gladly.
Hebrews 11:3 "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. (note it doesn't say made out of nothing)
John 1:1,3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Ephesians 3:9 " .... who created all things by Jesus Christ."
Jesus Christ is not nothing.

You are missing two key bits of evidence. Perhaps more.

One is the initial statement of the Bible. The Hebrew term for 'create' is (transliterated) 'bara' and means 'out of nothing'. This is radically different from the Hebrew word 'made', which is used in the sense of "... made an idol of wood..." I note you fail to address that scripture.

Second. The verses in John and Ephesians both say "...all things... " were created BY Christ, not FROM Christ. You're also forgetting Jesus Christ is the Second Person of the God head, and therefore God Himself. Just for the record, Jesus Christ - or God the Father, or God the Holy Spirit were not created at all, ever.

So your statement about 'nothing' is not valid.

Wouldn't it be something to find out that God already told us EXACTLY how He created the universe.

Yes it would. However, He didn't. He gave 'us' a brief and rather superficial statement that He did Create the Universe from nothing; no details of how it was accomplished.

Boltzmann Brain paradox.

From Ludwig Boltzman who is amazingly absent from even the history of physics. His name appears no where in any modern works on physics or cosmology.

His contribution - as such - was a speculation about how brains can only detect the sort of Universe in which we live if said Universe is much like ours is already. It seems a variation of the anthropic principle.

Eternal inflammation which Big bang needs which makes it more likely a small universe comes from the singularity than a huge fine-tuned Universe.

Nope. On two accounts. One, the Lemaitre hypothesis cum theory has nothing called 'infammation'. Nor does Boltzman's concept. (Since Boltzman's conjecture makes no testable predictions, it cannot even be a 'theory'.)

Of course some people cheats by trying to have God tied up with duck tape over his mouth and only allow him speak to to avoid these paradoxes produced by man's science.

Sorry, that reads to me like a series of nearly related words not quite congealing into a sentence.

 

[Dale]

Nope, Christianity has grown and is right on track with God's plan. No fool or anyone or group of people or nation could dethrone Christianity. I don't know where you heard that? After 150 years of Darwinism being shoved down our throats only 10% of the worlds population believe it. But it seems the percentages in America have dropped. This is do to liberalism, and drifting away from God. It's not really Darwin, it's people want to be on there own throne and director of their own destiny. They rebel against authority, constraints, so now you have moral relativism spreading. People want to be free to do whatever they want like gays getting married or aborting babies at anytime. Drugs , booze, foul language, sex and money. Sin is the culprit behind all of it. Darwin did do some damage though -- but that all was factored into the Plan.
Between 1700 and 1740, an estimated 75-80% of the population attended churches, which were being built at a headlong pace.
The following site shows the growth of Christianity throughout the centuries. By 1900, there were 500 million Christians in the world, and now 2.3 billion. That almost 1/3 of the planet, that's the remnant who are supposed be spared during Judgment Day. We're just about there.
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txx/numberch.htm

I'm afraid this post is confusing. First you say that “Christianity has grown” and is “right on track.” Then you say that people are “drifting away from God.”


I'm not sure why you are using the word “Darwinism.” This is a word used only by Creationists. Darwin wasn't a Darwinist. Darwin sought to understand the natural world. I have seen a quote from Charles Darwin where he says, paraphrasing, “If I'm wrong, the sooner I am attacked and destroyed, the better.”


As for the number of people in the world who believe in evolution, must of the world isn't educated in such matters.

 

[Dale]

Who you pick fights with is irrelevant if we care about the truth.

The false idea here is that we are preaching Christianity, which is the gospel of Jesus Christ, by the persuasiveness and power of men as orators, and by our own cleverness to convince people.

If this is so, then we should abandon the faith of Christianity because it is a false religion. Rather Paul said:

My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, - 1 Corinthians 2:4

O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” - 1 Timothy 6:20

Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. - Colossians 2:8

What is science itself?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

It's philosophy. Philosophy is a set of axioms believed, and then upon which, you build reasoning. But the axioms of science in themselves are "according to the basic principles of the world" and not according to Christ who created and exists forever above the principles of this world.

So science is like a neat little toy, and people can have jobs with it. I am an accountant, and God condones it. But if I go turning my accounting into the philosophy of how to live my life, I am greatly sinning and it's wrong and evil.

Likewise, if science is the vehicle to arrive at truth, then you errored by Colossians 2:8. You are following a philosophy and not Christ. Christ is not a philosophy but a life with power, and a word of truth with miracles following.

Also in Noah's day, he cared about truth and he was the only man who did, along with his family. The rest of the world perished. Many back then could have said, "You're barking up the wrong tree, Noah." "Why preach that way Noah? It doesn't help your cause, it hurts it! Be more like us! Believe what we believe, then we will listen."

But the test for truth is not whether we are "picking the wrong fight". The test for truth, is Jesus Christ who is truth. And as Paul stated, the apostle to the gentiles, hand picked by the resurrected Jesus Christ himself, Paul states that philosophy according to the basic principles of this world, is an enemy of Christ, not acceptance of Christ.

Razare,

Hello. I'm afraid you are badly misinformed about what science is. You say that science is philosophy and proceeds from axioms. No, it doesn't.


I have a degree in the sciences and I have worked at scientific jobs. One of my employers, with a Master's degree in chemistry, and about ten patents, told me about taking a course in philosophy. “After the first class I realized that they weren't making sense and I walked out and dropped the course,” he told me. That's how a lot of people with hands on experience in the sciences feel about the methods used by philosophers, or their conclusions.


You say that “picking the wrong fight” isn't “the test for truth.” Creationists have picked a fight with science that they can't win. As a result they are losing souls that might be saved. Because of Creationists, people who aren't deeply committed Christians have come to see Christianity as block headed rigidity. They see Christians as people who deny the obvious and reject the indisputable. They aren't willing to visit a church to see what Christians have to say for that very reason.


I have personally changed churches to get away from Creationists. Many have stopped going to church because of Creationists. That is part of the point I was trying to make.

 

[4x4toy]

No , God removed you so they could enjoy sanctuary

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Hello. I'm afraid you are badly misinformed about what science is.

Got that right. I get so frustrated trying to deal with people who don't know anything about science - and I mean NOTHING - who make statements as if they do.

I honestly get the idea some Christians have the idea ignorance is holiness. No where does God encourage His followers to be ignorant of anything.

You say that “picking the wrong fight” isn't “the test for truth.”

That's the truth. In nearly every discipline.

Creationists have picked a fight with science that they can't win.

Absolutely. They cannot win because they don't understand the discussion, to begin. The goal of Christianity - in terms of conflict - is to preach the good news so unbelievers will respond to God's call. Not to justify their own biases.

As a result they are losing souls that might be saved. Because of Creationists, people who aren't deeply committed Christians have come to see Christianity as block headed rigidity. They see Christians as people who deny the obvious and reject the indisputable.

Not to mention the flat out untruths taught to young people get discovered.

But the Creationists refuse to take responsibility for the problem.

Just as a basic lesson, anyone who conflates "evolution" with the history of the Universe simply doesn't know anything about the matter. End of that discussion.

 

[miamited]

Hi dale,

Just thought I'd jump in here for a moment. You responded:

Hello. I'm afraid you are badly misinformed about what science is. You say that science is philosophy and proceeds from axioms. No, it doesn't.

Technically and historically speaking, the greek word 'philosophy' which is translated from Paul's letter meant knowledge. What Paul is cautioning us about is accepting what is called 'knowledge'. The point is often made by those of the world that we don't believe as people ages ago believed because of the great knowledge we now have gained through the scientific method. He warns us that this great 'knowledge' that man believes he has over his predecessors will seek to turn us away from the truth that all things were made by and through Christ. He encourages us not to believe such claims and I don't.

However, I do fully understand that there will be, as there have always been, those among us who strive more to be in step with the world and it's philosophy
rather than God and His truth. It's ok and to be expected. For me, I've set as my tipping point that on the day that science can prove to me how a woman can become pregnant without having human sperm introduced to her egg, and it's something that could have been done 2,000 years ago, then I'll agree that science can 'prove' the things of God.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Ronald]

As for the number of people in the world who believe in evolution, must of the world isn't educated in such matters.

We have been in school. I think you made an interesting error in spelling. Let me rephrase it in a question:
Must the world be educated in such matters?

I'm afraid this post is confusing. First you say that “Christianity has grown” and is “right on track.” Then you say that people are “drifting away from God.”

It has grown in the world from 500 million in 1900 to 2.3 billion now. BUT the US has less of a percentage then it did back then. Wow, you can't get that? It's simple math. Even Europe used to be more Christian and now have fallen away -- and look we are all paying the price from turning away from God.

 

[Smidlee]

You are missing two key bits of evidence. Perhaps more.

One is the initial statement of the Bible. The Hebrew term for 'create' is (transliterated) 'bara' and means 'out of nothing'. This is radically different from the Hebrew word 'made', which is used in the sense of "... made an idol of wood..." I note you fail to address that scripture.

Second. The verses in John and Ephesians both say "...all things... " were created BY Christ, not FROM Christ. You're also forgetting Jesus Christ is the Second Person of the God head, and therefore God Himself. Just for the record, Jesus Christ - or God the Father, or God the Holy Spirit were not created at all, ever.

So your statement about 'nothing' is not valid.

Bara to create, to cut down (a wood),select,feed, - choose, create, cut down,dispatch, do ,make.

Noted that every video game , movie, story written in a book is created by man is not create out of nothing but by the word of man.
When a story and art is created we say it is written or drawn by someone we don't say it's written from someone.

Yes it would. However, He didn't. He gave 'us' a brief and rather superficial statement that He did Create the Universe from nothing; no details of how it was accomplished.

I disagree just as a movie, book ,etc is not out of nothing. (unless you mean by nothing as "not a physical thing")

The more scientist learn the harder it's becoming to defend realism. The universe seems to be created by information governed by invisible forces. (the effect of these forces can be seen)

From Ludwig Boltzman who is amazingly absent from even the history of physics. His name appears no where in any modern works on physics or cosmology.

I was not referring to the person but the paradox.

His contribution - as such - was a speculation about how brains can only detect the sort of Universe in which we live if said Universe is much like ours is already. It seems a variation of the anthropic principle.

Nope. On two accounts. One, the Lemaitre hypothesis cum theory has nothing called 'infammation'. Nor does Boltzman's concept. (Since Boltzman's conjecture makes no testable predictions, it cannot even be a 'theory'.)

Sorry, that reads to me like a series of nearly related words not quite congealing into a sentence.

The Boltzmann Brain paradox is the result of finding out how fine-tuned the universe is. Here is a short video that put the Boltzmann Brain paradox in simple terms.

The Big Bang has even more serious problems. For example E=Mc2 reveals the energy and mass can be converted one to another. But when you convert energy into mass it produces 50% matter and 50% anti-matter. BUT our universe is make up only of matter. The answer is to remove the duck tape from God's mouth and allow Him to speak to cause 100% of the energy convert to matter then put the tape over His mouth again until the next paradox.

 

[Smidlee]

This went on for quite a while. Gallileo was confined to his house and isolated from the populace for similar reasons. Gallileo offended the 'Church' by claiming the Sun was the center of the solar system; this was refuted by force on the grounds it contradicted the Bible. Copernicus was intimidated into holding his observations and theories until his death. Finally, the knowledge of the Sun being the center of the solar system was too great to ignore and the Church surrendered.

This is false. The conflict with Galileo and the church was more political than over science. It was the science of his day the reason it had problems. They liked his idea but told him not to claim it's true until there's evidence. Yet the Church accepted heliocentric model before the evidence came in.
Stars appear closer than they actually are because of our atmosphere. They knew if heliocentric was true there would be displacement in the stars as the earth goes around the sun. They didn't have the equipment to measure the displacement of the stars until centuries later. It was then they discovered the stars were much farther than they appeared in the sky.

This is a good example of the scientific method can come up with the wrong conclusion which is why scientist doesn't totally rely on it.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

This is false. The conflict with Galileo and the church was more political than over science.

So you believe and parrot the Churches' official excuse instead of the truth. If that's what you want. There's no point in continuing as long as you dodge.