Why does "15 Questions for Evolutionists" brochure confuse the meaning of "evolution?

[KWCrazy]

So when you say "Space" how far out in space and how much of the water that covered the Earth. We would need over 5 miles of water to cover the Earth globally.

The problem is that we have a shortage of accurate topographical maps dating back to the time of Noah. We don't know how high the mountains were or how deep the oceans were. We don't know if the planet was smaller and the separation of continents was caused by the "the fountains of the deep" bursting or if the world looked more or less as it does today. We don't know if the deep crevasses of the sea existed yet or if they formed to cause a place for the water to recede. We DO know that there are over 150 miracles listed in the Bible and science can't explain a single one of them. That's why they are miracles; the are not scientifically possible. We DO know that it isn't possible for a man to take on the sins of the world, be crucified and rise again on the third day. Yet despite the fact that such a thing is impossible, belief in the death and resurrection of Christ for the forgiveness of sin is our ONLY passage to Heaven. If you don't believe in the impossible, you aren't invited. If you deny that God has the power to do the impossible, then you are damned by your disbelief. You don;t have to believe that the flood was possible to be saved, but you have to acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the son of God and you have to accept His sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin.

If you can't grasp and embrace that wisdom, all other knowledge is foolishness. It will profit you nothing to understand everything about science and nothing about God.

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem is that we have a shortage of accurate topographical maps dating back to the time of Noah. We don't know how high the mountains were or how deep the oceans were. We don't know if the planet was smaller and the separation of continents was caused by the "the fountains of the deep" bursting or if the world looked more or less as it does today. We don't know if the deep crevasses of the sea existed yet or if they formed to cause a place for the water to recede. We DO know that there are over 150 miracles listed in the Bible and science can't explain a single one of them. That's why they are miracles; the are not scientifically possible. We DO know that it isn't possible for a man to take on the sins of the world, be crucified and rise again on the third day. Yet despite the fact that such a thing is impossible, belief in the death and resurrection of Christ for the forgiveness of sin is our ONLY passage to Heaven. If you don't believe in the impossible, you aren't invited. If you deny that God has the power to do the impossible, then you are damned by your disbelief. You don;t have to believe that the flood was possible to be saved, but you have to acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the son of God and you have to accept His sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin.

If you can't grasp and embrace that wisdom, all other knowledge is foolishness. It will profit you nothing to understand everything about science and nothing about God.

Another good post!

And lol @ your sig.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The problem is that we have a shortage of accurate topographical maps dating back to the time of Noah. We don't know how high the mountains were or how deep the oceans were. We don't know if the planet was smaller and the separation of continents was caused by the "the fountains of the deep" bursting or if the world looked more or less as it does today. We don't know if the deep crevasses of the sea existed yet or if they formed to cause a place for the water to recede. We DO know that there are over 150 miracles listed in the Bible and science can't explain a single one of them. That's why they are miracles; the are not scientifically possible. We DO know that it isn't possible for a man to take on the sins of the world, be crucified and rise again on the third day. Yet despite the fact that such a thing is impossible, belief in the death and resurrection of Christ for the forgiveness of sin is our ONLY passage to Heaven. If you don't believe in the impossible, you aren't invited. If you deny that God has the power to do the impossible, then you are damned by your disbelief. You don;t have to believe that the flood was possible to be saved, but you have to acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the son of God and you have to accept His sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin.

If you can't grasp and embrace that wisdom, all other knowledge is foolishness. It will profit you nothing to understand everything about science and nothing about God.

No, we know very well how high the mountains were and how deep the seas were in Noah's time. They were almost unchanged from today.


What makes you think that we wouldn't know such basic knowledge?

Everest may have been a few feet shorter, since it is rising slightly faster than it is eroding. The Mariana's Trench was surely almost identical to what it is today.

The history of the Earth is literally written in stone and myths will not change that.

It would take a bit over 5 miles of water to drown Everest.


I am ready to explain basic geology to anyone honest enough to want to learn it. Sadly AVET has already shown that he is a man without honor.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Why did God sign It, then?

Revelation 22:21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

Revelation 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

Why do you think it wasn't forged, as it were?

Also, you haven't really answered my previous question.

 

[KWCrazy]

What makes you think that we wouldn't know such basic knowledge?

Very simply, your understanding of what has been is based on what is observed. The past simply cannot be observed, nor do supernatural actions follow natural law. If the mountains have not heaved upward and if the crevasses of the ocean haven't deepened, then the water on the face of the earth was over 29,000 feet deep since the mountains were covered.

Everest may have been a few feet shorter, since it is rising slightly faster than it is eroding. The Mariana's Trench was surely almost identical to what it is today.

Based on what, specifically?

The history of the Earth is literally written in stone and myths will not change that.

The Word is based on the truth of God. Science, which is restrained by the physical laws it can study, cannot change the truth.

It would take a bit over 5 miles of water to drown Everest.

Yep.

I am ready to explain basic geology to anyone honest enough to want to learn it.

The creation serves the Creator, not vice versa.

 

[Adaephon]

Should someone explain parsimony to KWCrazy?

Take comfort in the fact that all that is important is known. Long live the Praxis!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Very simply, your understanding of what has been is based on what is observed. The past simply cannot be observed, nor do supernatural actions follow natural law. If the mountains have not heaved upward and if the crevasses of the ocean haven't deepened, then the water on the face of the earth was over 29,000 feet deep since the mountains were covered.

Wrong. The past is always observed. Anytime that you observe something you are looking at the past. Whether a microsecond or a million years. You merely have a prejudice against the method that science uses to look into the past. And I can assure you that in the last 4,000 years the amount of rise of the mountains has been minimal. If you are an honest person you can learn that much.

Based on what, specifically?

The Word is based on the truth of God. Science, which is restrained by the physical laws it can study, cannot change the truth. Those two instances are based upon the erosion rate for Everest and the uplift rate. For the Marianas trench it is more a matter of constant subduction. The Marianas trench is a subduction zone (hey, that's me!) so it is fairly stable in depth.

The creation serves the Creator, not vice versa.

What do you mean by that nonsensical quote? Are you going to claim that your god lies if all of the evidence supports what I said?

 

[Elendur]

...
The human eye takes still images 16 times per second, not milliseconds.
...

The "refresh rate" isn't the same as the "registration time".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you? Let's see if you understand the parameters of science.
1. If an event has a supernatural causation, what is the likelihood of science being able to discern the cause?

If life suddenly appeared on this planet without any evidence of previous life that would be discernible.

2. If an event violates the laws of physics, how does science validate or invalidate the event?

What do you mean invalidate an event? You might want to ask this question again.

3. If a seventh grade science project to create a balanced terrarium requires using living and mature plants to make it function, please give the scientific explanation why God would not do the same in creation; as He said He did.

God did not say anything. Again, this is your idea, you have to explain what you mean by it.

4. By the laws of thermodynamics we know that 1. Matter/ energy cannot be created, 2. Matter/energy is in a constant state of decay, and 3. At absolute zero, nothing happens. Now then, using science, let's start with a vacant universe. There is no energy so there is no heat, making absolute zero. How does science explain the creation of everything from nothing in a state where nothing can happen, using only the natural laws of physics?

Watch:
Krauss '09: "A Universe From Nothing" - YouTube

5. Science has determined that life comes only from life. Abiogenesis, while a popular theory, has never been replicated even under controlled conditions that could never possibly have happened on the earth. How does science then explain the origination of life. Note: if you mention panspermia, the follow-up will be how life originated on the other planet/ asteroid/ cosmic volleyball.

No, you misstated the law against spontaneous generation. And the various steps of abiogenesis have been observed. The whole thing has not been put together yet.

6. A man prophet makes predictions about things he cannot possibly know because they occur in the future; sometimes near, sometimes far. Everything he predicts comes true exactly as predicted. Since ancient prophets didn't have a time machine, how could he have known the future?

It would be impressive if that ever happened. Too bad the Bible has all of the hallmarks of prophesy being written after the event, editing to make prophesies to come "true", and Nostradamus type prophesies that cover multiple events. Tell me when you find someone that matches your statement.

7. Two men go to college. One studies the Scriptures and the ancient texts to get a more clear understanding of the relationship between God and man throughout our existence. The other studies science books written by people who pretend that God doesn't exist. The first becomes a pastor, has a long career and leads many people do Christ. The second becomes a researcher, drinks too much, has two failed marriages and grows increasingly cynical about life in general. He spends his last decade as a professor, passing on his antipathy toward everything not "scientific" to the next generation. When they die, they both discover that there is, indeed, a God. The pastor goes to Heaven and the researcher goes to Hell. Question: Which is the gullible one and which is the fool?

Nobody "pretends" gods don't exist. The rest of your statement is foolish and insulting. How about the pastor that becomes a child abuser? It has happened in the past it will happen again. It has been epidemic in the Catholic church.

I am sorry but your last question was both an insulting and stupid one.

 

[USincognito]

Based on what, specifically?

Here. Your tax dollars paid for this.
The Himalayas [This Dynamic Earth, USGS]

 

[USincognito]

5. Science has determined that life comes only from life.

Sort of. For certain definitions of "life".

Abiogenesis, while a popular theory,

Hypotesis actually, and there are several of them.

...has never been replicated even under controlled conditions that could never possibly have happened on the earth.

How do you draw the conclusion you assert in the second part from your observation in the first part?

How does science then explain the origination of life.

It's still working on it. However the evidence of common descent over the last 3.5 billion years since the advent of life (however it occured) is incontrovertible.

 

[Rilke's Granddaughter]

Why does the "15 Questions for Evolutionists" brochure from Creation.com confuse the meaning of "evolution"? Why would a Young Earth Creationist ministry wish to expose their "science knowledge" in this way?

Most of the questions deal with topics which have nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution. Why? Is it scientific ignorance? Or dishonesty? Very shrewd propaganda technique?

15 questions for evolutionists

These people are certainly intelligent enough to understand the facts. I personally believe it is willful distortion.

 

[RainbowDashIsBestPony]

These people are certainly intelligent enough to understand the facts. I personally believe it is willful distortion.

Willful distortion is far too common, if you ask me.

 

[JustMeSee]

Whether the Flood was 4000 years ago, or 400 years ago, I would like to know where the evidence for this natural retaining wall is, if the Flood was just a local one.

Maybe, God 'cleaned it up after the flood'. What do you think?

 

[KWCrazy]

Maybe, God 'cleaned it up after the flood'. What do you think?

I think the idea of a local flood is the creation of someone who wants to believe in God and still be popular with the atheists.

 

[RainbowDashIsBestPony]

I think the idea of a local flood is the creation of someone who wants to believe in God and still be popular with the atheists.

There are many Christians who reject a literal interpretation of the Old Testament (such as verysincere). Why? Because it's just silly. There's no need to single out atheists.

 

[KWCrazy]

There are many Christians who reject a literal interpretation of the Old Testament (such as verysincere). Why? Because it's just silly. There's no need to single out atheists.

Okay, I'll include the disbelieving believers. As for VS's disbelief, that's between him and God. After many, many attempts to get him to back up his claims with actual Scripture I gave up and sent him to ignoreville. It's easy to say, "the Bible doesn't say that." However, when 15 versions of the Bible all same the same thing in more or less the same words and you present nothing to validate your assertion that they are all wrong, then you lose all your credibility.

Jesus stated that the Scriptures were true, inspired by God, and worthy of using for teaching and instruction. Was He lying? He mentioned Noah by name and spoke of the great flood. Was He lying? He spoke of Adam and Eve as the first man and woman, created by God and made one flesh through marriage. Was He lying?

 

[KWCrazy]

There are 333 miracles listed in the Bible. I wonder how many of them our disbelieving believers believe actually happened.

 

[AV1611VET]

I think the idea of a local flood is the creation of someone who wants to believe in God and still be popular with the atheists.

That is sooooo true!

 

[AV1611VET]

There are 333 miracles listed in the Bible.

John Hagee, in his book, Jerusalem Countdown (?), says there are 333 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ; of which He fulfilled 109 of them in His first advent, and will fulfill the remaining 224 at His second advent.