Why do people even want to put evolution in the equation?

[Thomas White]

It appears to me that you are without the realization that Genesis is about Christ, and authored by Him, through the pen of Moses.

To disbelieve God's testimony about His own creation, is to disbelieve Christ Himself, for He is both the Creator of it and the attestor to the account of it.

To believe man's conjectures about God's creation, is to believe man himself, for he is both the conjector to it and the denier of it's reckoning.

If we start by redefining the reckoning in Genesis, then we are not constrained to redefine the reckoning in any of it.

Consider the first step, above all others, for the direction of it determines the rest of the way.

Man is liar, even if he thinks he's telling the truth, he is not; for that would mean that God is liar: man may only tell the truth in so far as he does not contradict what God has already said.

When you read a recipe, does it tell you what the food looks like at every stage? Mostly not. Does that mean the recipe is wrong or the author is lying? Of course not.

Creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Evolution is the picture of the Creation.

 

[GenemZ]

Creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Evolution is the picture of the Creation.

Let's see. God has now evolved into being a liar?

Using Scripture you need to show us how your claim is truth.

Until you can? What you said are just empty words.

Please.. using Scripture prove your claim how Evolution is the picture of the Creation.

 

[Thomas White]

Let's see. God has now evolved into being a liar?

Using Scripture you need to show us how your claim is truth.

Until you can? What you said are just empty words.

Please.. using Scripture prove your claim how Evolution is the picture of the Creation.

Does Scripture prove that natural law allows for an internal combustion engine? Since it does not, does that mean my belief that cars are real make God a liar?

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

Would you tell Jesus that?

How did Jesus refute Satan? "It is written."

How many times do we read about Jesus saying...."It is written."


(there were no voice recorders back then) Writing.

Truth!

 

[Job 33:6]

Let's see. God has now evolved into being a liar?

Using Scripture you need to show us how your claim is truth.

Until you can? What you said are just empty words.

Please.. using Scripture prove your claim how Evolution is the picture of the Creation.

An understanding of evolution is typically grounded in physical observation and first hand experience of creation. Whereas scripture, while being God's word, is a second-hand description of some aspects creation in which we cannot directly observe, but rather we interpret through written word.

Someone can read scripture in a closed room with no windows and can imagine what creation might look like, but direct first hand observation of creation will always provide a more clear picture in comparison to a second-hand interpretation of written word. Especially if the Word largely doesn't discuss such matters in detail (to be fair, the book of Genesis is relatively brief).

With the above said, scripture is not needed for someone to believe that the sun is hot or that rocks are hard or that rotten fish smells or that trains make loud sounds. All of these conclusions can be rationally and correctly made based on direct observation, just as evolution can, independently from scripture.

 

[coffee4u]

behemoth that is a hippo, and leviathan that is a crocodile?

Been reading some bad foot notes I see.
Its tail sways like a cedar;
Show me any hippo who has a tail like a ceder tree and I will eat my hat.

That creature is not a hippo.

As for a crocodile, while it's description is not as bad, us Aussies are kind of famous for the whole 'croc hunting' tag. Tying the croc's jaw with a rope or tape it standard handling procedure.
Job 41
“Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook
or tie down its tongue with a rope?
Nope, but you sure can with a croc.


You wish them to be a hippo and a crocodile because a dragon or 'dinosaur' doesn't fit in with your world view. The descriptions though fit with a plant eating dinosaur and a sea monster.

 

[Thomas White]

Been reading some bad foot notes I see.
Its tail sways like a cedar;
Show me any hippo who has a tail like a ceder tree and I will eat my hat.
View attachment 296810
That creature is not a hippo.

As for a crocodile, while it's description is not as bad, us Aussies are kind of famous for the whole 'croc hunting' tag. Tying the croc's jaw with a rope or tape it standard handling procedure.
Job 41
“Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook
or tie down its tongue with a rope?
Nope, but you sure can with a croc.
View attachment 296809

You wish them to be a hippo and a crocodile because a dragon or 'dinosaur' doesn't fit in with your world view. The descriptions though fit with a plant eating dinosaur and a sea monster.

Gargantuan squid.

 

[loveofourlord]

They were making an argument for the problem of "irreducible complexity". So to quote you, back to you ...

"*face paws* congratulations :> You managed to get not a single thing correct :>"

No I get that, their examples were stuff that nothing in evolution expects to happen, so it's still facepawingly stupid. Nothing he said was related to life or evolution. It's not dogs becoming cats, or a male dog now having to find a female dog, thats just idiotic at it's basest point.

 

[loveofourlord]

So, why did God lie?

He could have told us about evolution getting us to where we now find ourselves. Why lie?

Sex would have taken too long to evolve. Creatures (if they were possible that way) would have long died before any sexual reproduction could take place.

Again learn something about evolution it's not a all or nothing thing. Here is a possability your assuming the first sexes were male or female and not hermaphrodites or such which already exist like is it slugs I think? Once everthing has both pairs it's not that hard to lose one.

And god didn't lie, he told what the early people could understand. Again the evidence shows evolution is true, it's either rejct it or reject god. And your why so many reject god when they realize the truth of Evolution.

 

[loveofourlord]

Man was already created in God's Image BEFORE any body was given.

You're missing it.

Man's soul was created in God's Image. Male and female souls.

And? That doesn't demand that humans look like apes or anything, just that what ever would evolve would have the spirits and souls.

 

[loveofourlord]

Been reading some bad foot notes I see.
Its tail sways like a cedar;
Show me any hippo who has a tail like a ceder tree and I will eat my hat.
View attachment 296810
That creature is not a hippo.

As for a crocodile, while it's description is not as bad, us Aussies are kind of famous for the whole 'croc hunting' tag. Tying the croc's jaw with a rope or tape it standard handling procedure.
Job 41
“Can you pull in Leviathan with a fishhook
or tie down its tongue with a rope?
Nope, but you sure can with a croc.
View attachment 296809

You wish them to be a hippo and a crocodile because a dragon or 'dinosaur' doesn't fit in with your world view. The descriptions though fit with a plant eating dinosaur and a sea monster.

I can't post the videos of the hippo tail moving LIKE a ceder for the very reason I wouldn't have posted that pic...it's a bit gross, but if you don't mind...hippo's doing bodily functions look up hippo tail swishing. It VERy much moves LIKE a ceder. Notice it doesn't say IS a ceder, it moves like one swaying back and forth in the wind.

As for crocodile, were talking middle eastern people thousands of years ago, not someone with duct tape and such. Also you would think if there were actually dinosaurs around there be some evidence of it, funny how all the supposed pics of dinosaurs are eitehr fraudulent, or blatent misserpersentations.

 

[coffee4u]

I can't post the videos of the hippo tail moving LIKE a ceder for the very reason I wouldn't have posted that pic...it's a bit gross, but if you don't mind...hippo's doing bodily functions look up hippo tail swishing. It VERy much moves LIKE a ceder. Notice it doesn't say IS a ceder, it moves like one swaying back and forth in the wind.

As for crocodile, were talking middle eastern people thousands of years ago, not someone with duct tape and such. Also you would think if there were actually dinosaurs around there be some evidence of it, funny how all the supposed pics of dinosaurs are eitehr fraudulent, or blatent misserpersentations.

You assume it mans those modern creatures because you expect it to be those creatures. If this was a fantasy book with those descriptions your mind would go to other things. They are both very good descriptions of what a land or sea dinosaur could look like. People 'know' they are not only because they don't believe dragons lived with man. If you believe dragons/dinosaurs were just another animal made by God on day 6 you can clearly see this is what they are. A modern day Komodo dragon is about the closest thing we have left. They can be 3 meters long and they can kill humans.

The evidence of dinosaurs is that dragon legends can be found all around the world. Long before they invented the word dinosaur people talked of dragons. Dragons were just an animal like any other. Some grew large before the flood due to the climate others were as small as a chicken. Then the flood came and killed most of them and then they became extinct like any other creature whose food is limited and who is hunted by man.
There is nothing mysterious or other worldly about large lizards. People have simply romanticized and embellished them into this big 'thing' and made silly movies attempting to make them as smart as people.

Then when they do find dinosaurs remains with red blood cells or a nest ready to hatch they are claimed to be millions of years old. They are merely some overgrown thousand year old lizard.

 

[loveofourlord]

You assume it mans those modern creatures because you expect it to be those creatures. If this was a fantasy book with those descriptions your mind would go to other things. They are both very good descriptions of what a land or sea dinosaur could look like. People 'know' they are not only because they don't believe dragons lived with man. If you believe dragons/dinosaurs were just another animal made by God on day 6 you can clearly see this is what they are. A modern day Komodo dragon is about the closest thing we have left. They can be 3 meters long and they can kill humans.

The evidence of dinosaurs is that dragon legends can be found all around the world. Long before they invented the word dinosaur people talked of dragons. Dragons were just an animal like any other. Some grew large before the flood due to the climate others were as small as a chicken. Then the flood came and killed most of them and then they became extinct like any other creature whose food is limited and who is hunted by man.
There is nothing mysterious or other worldly about large lizards. People have simply romanticized and embellished them into this big 'thing' and made silly movies attempting to make them as smart as people.

Then when they do find dinosaurs remains with red blood cells or a nest ready to hatch they are claimed to be millions of years old. They are merely some overgrown thousand year old lizard.

Yeah there are legends of dragons, probably from dinosaurs, I mean it's not like dinosaur bones were just found in the last hundred or so years. We know that the griffon likely came from protoceratops fossils, why would it be a surprise that other legends are from finding bones of giant beasts.

 

[Religiot]

because young earth believers deny the overwhelming evidence of God Given General Revelation that states the universe is undeniably billions of years old.

God-given? What are you talking about?

Because those Christians believe that God would deceive by creating massive direct and indirect evidence for evolution in genetics biology and paleontology.

No Christian, at any point in time, considers God a deceiver: do you not know, that to call God a deceiver disqualifies that person as Christian?

If evolution is not true then God has tried very hard to deceive his creatures.

Wow... ...don't you see how you're putting your faith in evolution, and that, directly against God?

Explain to me why God created humans with a second chromosome to look strongly like two fused ape chromosomes. Why did God create apes with 24 pairs of chromosomes and humans with 23 and make it look like chromosome 2 is the fusion of two ape chromosomes? Is God a deceiver?

Wow--you're really gonna stick to the God-is-a-deceiver bit, aren't you?
Why not present your claims scientifically instead? i.e., why not present them with the citation of a scientist who shares your faith in evolution, and another scientist who doesn't share your faith; and make deductions from such comparisons, like a real scientist would?

Why is God such a rotten engineer that the recurrent laryngeal nerve is in the wrong place and takes a long route which is horribly inefficient?

Where is the adverse view to your assertion?

In order for your claims to be considered scientific, they must be falsifiable: where is the attempted falsification to your assertion?

 

[Religiot]

I was talking to someone else about how life changed after initial creation. That's what I was referring to.

I don't believe there have been two creations. I think youre speaking to the wrong person if you think that I do.

You jumped into the conversation kind of out of the blue and I wasn't sure what you were talking about so I edited my last answer for you.



As someone noted above, young earthers, while often times they are honest with their interpretations of scripture, they tend to not be particularly honest (at least not public speakers for yecism) when it comes to discussions about creation itself as observed through science.

I could easily go into websites like answers in genesis for example, and could easily find factually incorrect misinformation (typically misrepresentation of scientific information). It's just the way it is.

But to be particular, I've posted a video a couple times now in this thread that I think YECs tend to either not understand (which is fine, most people aren't scientists and I don't expect everyone to just instantly understand), but some YECs also do not want to understand. They don't want to take an honest approach on what exists in creation. Which I view as an extension of Gods word, as He spoke creation into existence.

If you're a yec, you're welcome to be a subject of my words, below is the video if you would like to take an honest approach to the topic. Feel free to review the brief video below and describe how yecism accounts for the existences of corresponding phylogenetic trees.

And if you have any questions about the video, I don't bite, and you are welcome to ask.

Thanks for your response, but I don't have any questions save the ones I've asked recently in a previous post to you, and I'll ask them here again.

Your claims are without the opposing view, so they are not here presented as scientific, but merely your statements of faith in some other man's claims of discovery: you must include an opposing view, that endeavors to falsify you claims, otherwise, your claims are nothing more than statements of faith.

 

[GenemZ]

And god didn't lie, he told what the early people could understand. Again the evidence shows evolution is true, it's either rejct it or reject god. And your why so many reject god when they realize the truth of Evolution.

What is it that you are are you rejecting?

I reject young earth creationism. But, not creationism.

You seem to suffer from Biblical illiteracy and tunnel vision. Only seeing what the young earth creationists push as being the only alternative to what you ran to.

I tell you. I would also be an evolutionist if young earth creationism were the only option.

 

[GenemZ]

And? That doesn't demand that humans look like apes or anything, just that what ever would evolve would have the spirits and souls.

You really have no grasp on the details...

 

[Religiot]

Ok. To keep this simple, I'll just say that my point of view regarding the Theory of Evolution comes as it does from the fact that I grew up in a libertarian household in which an appreciationg of the sciences was generally fostered. Thus, while growing up, I heard a lot from my dad's interest in NASA and we watched the television program, COSMOS, hosted by Carl Sagan when it was on in the early 1980s. And as a child, I also was quite fond of all that I could learn about dinosaurs. I thought that they, along with pseudo-scientific fictions found in Star Trek, Star Wars, King Kong & Godzilla and comic books, were fascinating.

But now that I'm older, and in looking back at all that I've read and studied, my still Christian position and understanding of evolution is not dissimilar from that of April Maskiewicz Cordero, Ph.D.

See this other Christian Forum thread I made a few years back in which there is a youtube video by April where she explains her own understanding of Evolution and how she holds it in tandem with her own Christian faith:

She embraced the E Word as she contemplated the F Word....!

Your faith in another person's faith, is still faith, but faith in man.

--And with respect, I was asking you to tell me, with your words--not refer me to listen to someone else's--your faith in another person's faith doesn't interest me, yet I am still interested in your defense of that faith; so please, feel free to elaborate more, in your words.

 

[Religiot]

Would you tell Jesus that?

Yes.

How did Jesus refute Satan? "It is written."

Indeed.

How many times do we read about Jesus saying...."It is written."

Many.

(there were no voice recorders back then) Writing.

You're dead wrong: the truest voice recorder ever created is the human heart--God has now chosen to also write His words in it.

 

[Religiot]

Creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

The very terms you are using prove their opposition.

Evolution is the picture of the Creation.

Only if the picture is a man made fiction.