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

[Chi.C]

Until Young Earth creationists can answer the right questions honestly about prehistoric fossils? You leave intelligent people who understand enough scientific data with no choice but to accept the theory of Evolution.

Its your fault. For, many times the restored earth doctrine (GAP) has been blindly rejected by YEC's. Its your own fault that evolutionists have gained such confidence. Trouble is, YEC's are blinded by their heartfelt loyalty to tradition, rather than finding out what the Bible in the original languages is shouting out to believers. But their religious training that has programmed them keeps getting in the way.

I would love to see some young earth creationists evolve into a clearer understanding of the Scriptures. Until they do? They are begging for evolutionists to dominate over them. They do, except not in their own minds.
.....

I am an old earth creationist. It is true that I have not rebuked my YEC brothers enough. But where YEC commits a sin, evolutionist are committing an unforgivable sin. Is that why it is my fault? Why do you judge brothers who sin and justify blasphemers who are unforgivable. While both are wrong, the ignorance of YECs do not change the very fabric of our understanding of God. While upholding evolution seeking to rewrite the Scriptures, the evolutionist usurping the authority of the bible with their knowledge.

Know this there is nothing wrong with belief of evolution as long as your keep it to yourself. But when you proclaim in the public square and scream to rewrite the Scriptures based on this "belief", there is no choice for a Christian and this is to condemn. Love God or Love the World.

Yes... evolutionists swallow lies. And, so do young earth creationists. Its the closed minds of young earth creationists that gives the evolutionist the freedom to dominate the narrative in the public arena. If the GAP understanding were presented with clarity? It would leave the evolutionist without the sense of having no choice but to reject creationism.

Its a vanity battle. One that Satan wants to get the upper hand in controlling the narrative in the public arena As long as the Word of God is not yet properly understood? Satan will have dominion. And, will have great power with the evolutionist in seeing flaws in logic to be mocking deservingly.

A good witness does not mean it will win over the other side. It will mean it will leave them to be without excuse. Young Earth Creationism leaves them comfortably smug. For, its a bad but well intentioned, sincere witness for the truth.

Good intentions and sincerity does not transform error into truth.
.....

Your logic is flawed. A killer is justified killing a thief, because the thief is a criminal also. A nation should launch their entire nuclear arsenal at a rogue nation because they exploded a pipe bomb in the capital. To cure the disease, you kill the patient.

Rebuke your brother for sinning, condemn the blasphemer for blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

 

[GenemZ]

I am an old earth creationist. It is true that I have not rebuked my YEC brothers enough. But where YEC commits a sin, evolutionist are committing an unforgivable sin. Is that why it is my fault? Why do you judge brothers who sin and justify blasphemers who are unforgivable. While both are wrong, the ignorance of YECs do not change the very fabric of our understanding of God. While upholding evolution seeking to rewrite the Scriptures, the evolutionist usurping the authority of the bible with their knowledge.

Know this there is nothing wrong with belief of evolution as long as your keep it to yourself. But when you proclaim in the public square and scream to rewrite the Scriptures based on this "belief", there is no choice for a Christian and this is to condemn. Love God or Love the World.


Your logic is flawed. A killer is justified killing a thief, because the thief is a criminal also. A nation should launch their entire nuclear arsenal at a rogue nation because they exploded a pipe bomb in the capital. To cure the disease, you kill the patient.

Rebuke your brother for sinning, condemn the blasphemer for blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

You missed my closing remark.....

A good witness does not mean it will win over the other side. It will mean it will leave them to be without excuse. Young Earth Creationism leaves them comfortably smug. For, its a bad, but well intentioned sincere witness for the truth.

 

[coffee4u]

Please understand that, as an academically inclined person

The one thing that we all have is the same evidence, but while an evolutionist sees natural progression from a series of fossils we see the same creator reusing the same basic principles. The evidence itself doesn't change, we just view how it came to be differently.
Science decided that natural progression fitted what was being seen the best but other explanations can be used, that of special creation.

If only naturalistic methods are being looked at then natural decent makes some kind of sense. Away from the revelation of God I can see why it's believed to be true because it appears to fit what can be seen. I use to believe it myself.

Those of us who believe special creation don't do so because of evidence, but because God says this is how he created it. There is no reason why what appears to be natural progression in a fossil can't instead be the same creator reusing and reshaping parts as he wanted across species. To say this is not a possibility is saying "God cannot create creature in a similar fashion" Surely God can do whatever he wants?
At this point it comes down to faith. Faith in man who says this is evidence of natural progression over time or faith in God who says he created them all over a few days.

The other thing that is missing is that no one was there at creation to see or measure the world. It's an assumption to say it was the same as it is now, that all the same laws applied.
For example absolute dating is often based on the amount of carbon-14 or other radioactive element that remains in a fossil. Carbon-14 has a half-life of 5,370 years. We are not saying it doesn't have that half life now. But now is not then. If cosmic rays cause the formation of carbon-14 and this was very different at creation this will cause the whole method to be off except to how it applies now.

So I am not bothered or swayed by what evidence is found because man will never known what the world was like at creation as it can never be tested or measured. This is a big missing piece. Since God has told us that he created over 6 days I choose to believe that man is the one who has things wrong not God's word. So I agree with brother Religiot that it is faith in another person's faith.

 

[coffee4u]

I am an old earth creationist. It is true that I have not rebuked my YEC brothers enough.

Are you God sir? It is not up to you to rebuke us. We believe what we believe from God's word, in faith.

 

[coffee4u]

And what did it look like when He created it?

Which is exactly the point, we don't know and neither do you nor does the scientist.

 

[Thomas White]

Which is exactly the point, we don't know and neither do you nor does the scientist.

Really? Because there's plenty of physical evidence to the contrary.

 

[d taylor]

Get back to the 99.9% please.

You filtered out a gnat and left in a camel...

You either believe God's complete creation given in the Bible or not. But adding in something from science to God's creation, is not supported by The Bible. You can call it gnats and camels if you want.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Like I said before, condescension is not wrong, doing it pridefully is... so no worries.

... why do you keep insisting that I'm being "prideful" when I've already clarified to you that I don't in any way think I am?

... and didn't you already indicate to me above in post #212 that you don't think I'm being prideful?

You said in post #212, "Well, I don't mean that you were prideful, only that your condescension felt like it was."

Which is it?

Y'know, until we get this misunderstanding cleared away between us, I'll refrain from addressing the rest of your post below ...

The writers themselves are nothing more than vessels containing the same water: it is the water that must be considered, not the writers, and this the writers would tell you themselves. --it is carnal, and thus contrary to the truth, to attempt to adjudge the intent of the writers apart from the writing as a whole. The scriptures, not the writers, are the word of God: God expressed Himself through these vessels, not the vessels through God; wherefore we must look to the harmony found in scripture, as a whole, in order to understand the meaning in sound doctrine.

Strictly, Satan does not know everything, but as far as compared to us he does. And, no, I don't agree that he is in a weak position, but on the contrary, I believe he is presently the ruler of this world--by the consent of God, of course, yet no less the ruler in-fact.

Can you explain how love is a person? --not the word love, for that would be an absurdity--I'm strictly referring to the concept of love, that it is a person, a Spirit, like the truth, that it too is the same Spirit, visible, inexplicably, in your mind's eye, and sensible, in your soul's heart...

--God's nature cannot be fully known now, but will be known then; therefore, do not deprecate what has never been expressed to you, nor conclude it absurdity because it has never been articulated to you: it cannot be uttered.

The truth is a person, Christ; Christ is God's word, also--talk about things difficult to articulate: how can Christ, the word of God, be also His Son? and how could God also be the word? --I don't know, but I know that I believe it. (To me, anyone imagining that they can explain the ontology of God is simply someone who really hasn't attempted to think it through.)

To summarize: The truth is a person, the Creator of the universe: nothing can exist without Him, not Satan, not any thing, for all of it is by Him and for Him, and by Him all things consist. Wherefore, we strive for the truth, intimately, for to walk in the truth is to be one with Christ.

--truth, therefore, by extension, is a state of being, as love.

Fundamental knowledge is basic knowledge, i.e., base knowledge, foundational knowledge; knowledge of first things: the foundation to epistemology is like the foundation to a house, without the concrete or stone, the house cannot be made to stand for long against any assault--true fundamental knowledge grounds conceptions in reality.

Evidence to me is no more than what is plain to ascertain: for example, fire is hot, and demonstrably so, by simple experimentations that will yield a flame, a person know, that fire is indeed hot.

Remember, the word science solely means knowledge, thus any scientific methodology for the ascertainment of facts would be more clearly referred to as a knowledgeable methodology.

 

[Job 33:6]

I reviewed your post, and I have not learned anything that constitutes evidence for evolution, but the same claims you've made in previous posts.

Please try to answer the following, scientifically:

How do you determine the age of the rocks?

Well hold on. First I have to ask, do you understand the meaning of the summation video? Because that's what I'm making the case for. We have to be on the same page at the very beginning or nothing else I say will make any sense.

And yes, so to understand relative dating of rocks, necessary to understand the summation proof as described in the video, I look at which rocks are above or below other rocks. It's called superposition.

And superposition is pretty straight forward. Deeper rocks are older and shallower rocks are younger. If shallower rocks were older, then they would be floating in mid air without rocks under themselves. For the same reason that a chair must exist in place at an older time than myself when I sit on it. Else I would have nothing to sit on and would fall on the floor. The chair must be pre-exist me, because if the chair was not there first, I'd have nothing to sit on. And rocks are the same way. The rocks on the bottom must be there first, else the rocks on top could not rest on them.

And with this simple understanding, we can observe what fossils are in older rocks and what fossils are in younger rocks, so that we can put evolution to the test.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The one thing that we all have is the same evidence, but while an evolutionist sees natural progression from a series of fossils we see the same creator reusing the same basic principles. The evidence itself doesn't change, we just view how it came to be differently.
Science decided that natural progression fitted what was being seen the best but other explanations can be used, that of special creation.

If only naturalistic methods are being looked at then natural decent makes some kind of sense. Away from the revelation of God I can see why it's believed to be true because it appears to fit what can be seen. I use to believe it myself.

Those of us who believe special creation don't do so because of evidence, but because God says this is how he created it. There is no reason why what appears to be natural progression in a fossil can't instead be the same creator reusing and reshaping parts as he wanted across species. To say this is not a possibility is saying "God cannot create creature in a similar fashion" Surely God can do whatever he wants?
At this point it comes down to faith. Faith in man who says this is evidence of natural progression over time or faith in God who says he created them all over a few days.

The other thing that is missing is that no one was there at creation to see or measure the world. It's an assumption to say it was the same as it is now, that all the same laws applied.
For example absolute dating is often based on the amount of carbon-14 or other radioactive element that remains in a fossil. Carbon-14 has a half-life of 5,370 years. We are not saying it doesn't have that half life now. But now is not then. If cosmic rays cause the formation of carbon-14 and this was very different at creation this will cause the whole method to be off except to how it applies now.

So I am not bothered or swayed by what evidence is found because man will never known what the world was like at creation as it can never be tested or measured. This is a big missing piece. Since God has told us that he created over 6 days I choose to believe that man is the one who has things wrong not God's word. So I agree with brother Religiot that it is faith in another person's faith.

That's all fine by me if you see what you see, sister. I'm not here to contest this with you. Please look at my post above, #19, to see to whom and what I was originally stating.

I just want to get folks over this "those who believe in evolution are calling God a liar" stuff ...

Thank you!

 

[Chi.C]

You missed my closing remark.....
A good witness does not mean it will win over the other side. It will mean it will leave them to be without excuse. Young Earth Creationism leaves them comfortably smug. For, its a bad, but well intentioned sincere witness for the truth.

Second commandment - “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them." To justify creation in 6 days, they create an elaborate cosmic scheme to explain scientific observation. By saying you are not a christian unless you believe in 6 thousand year and the elaborate cosmic scheme they empower the image of what is above and below, they are violating the 2nd commandment.

 

[coffee4u]

Really? Because there's plenty of physical evidence to the contrary.

The evidence shows how the world is now not how it was at creation. That world is gone. It changed first at the fall and again at the flood.

 

[coffee4u]

That's all fine by me if you see what you see, sister. I'm not here to contest this with you. Please look at my post above, #19, to see to whom and what I was originally stating.

I just want to get folks over this "those who believe in evolution are calling God a liar" stuff ...

Thank you!

It's not me saying that, but many here seem feel to call us liars too, if you care to pursue this and other threads. One up there says he "I have not rebuked my YEC brothers enough." How very charitable of him.

 

[Chi.C]

Are you God sir? It is not up to you to rebuke us. We believe what we believe from God's word, in faith.

I am not God. That is why I obey the rules and ideas of the Scriptures.
Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

Second commandment - “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them."

To justify creation in 6 days, have you not created an elaborate cosmic scheme to explain scientific observation.

The sin is not the belief in the 6 days by itself, the sin is using that belief to test other Christians. Paraphrase unless I believe in 6 thousand year and the elaborate cosmic scheme, I am not a Christian. You are giving power and worship to an image of what is above.

Are you asking me to respect, observe and pay tribute to the image of the elaborate cosmic scheme by asking if I am God?

 

[coffee4u]

I am not God. That is why I obey the rules and ideas of the Scriptures.
Titus 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

Second commandment - “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them."

To justify creation in 6 days, have you not create an elaborate cosmic scheme to explain scientific observation.

The sin is not the belief in the 6 days by itself, the sin is using that belief to test other Christians. Paraphrase unless I believe in 6 thousand year and the elaborate cosmic scheme, I am not a Christian. You are giving power and worship to an image of what is above.

Are you asking me to respect, observe and pay tribute to the image of the elaborate cosmic scheme by asking if I am God?

I was trying to make you see that you have no authority to rebuke us, not unless you are God, which you are not.

Scripture is the breathed word of God.
We have believed nothing that is not stated in scripture.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
God said it, we believe it. It is no more elaborate than that.

If you choose to believe in something else is up to you.

Science cannot test the world that was created, it isn't here to test. That world is gone. It changed first at the fall and again at the flood. What they are testing is the world as it is now. The groaning world.
Romans 8:22
We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.

Creation teaches us how sin came to be.
Sin and death were brought in by one man-Adam.
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned--

Read my posts, not one will say you have to believe in 6 day creation to be a Christian. But I do believe you are missing out on the richness of the full picture, the beauty of scripture by following after the knowledge of men.

 

[Religiot]

... why do you keep insisting that I'm being "prideful" when I've already clarified to you that I don't in any way think I am?

I'm not. You've misunderstood me.

... and didn't you already indicate to me above in post #212 that you don't think I'm being prideful?

I felt like you were, but after you denied it, I believed you.

Which is it?

Now, I'm in doubt--because this misunderstanding could've been clarified with a simple line of questioning; so, I'm in doubt now.

Y'know, until we get this misunderstanding cleared away between us, I'll refrain from addressing the rest of your post below ...

I understand.

For clarity: I meant all that I said, in the order I said it, and still mean all that I've said. You misconstrued my responses to mean that I was still accusing you, but I was not: I was simply repeating that condescension is not a bad thing, but with pride it is--that's what I initially thought about your first response, that it was condescension in pride, but after you denied it I believed you, tho I now doubt it.

--My standing in doubt of you, now, should not prevent our conversation.

Remember, pride is not an action, but condescension is: pride is a state of being, thus it can be hidden, but condescension cannot.

Very important to our conversation is the fact that I do not hold anything against you concerning any perceptions I may have about you, including my doubts, because I find such judging to be unrighteous under these circumstances, for after all, we are speaking here anonymously, and through a very restricted medium; therefore, I reserve my judgments, solely, for what you say with clarity, concerning our faith.

Moreover, please excuse my grammar and syntax, it is not conventional, but private: that idiocy of mine is born of necessity, because I lack a formal education, and English is a second language to me, thus my writing will include peculiarities that will tend to confusion, like, for instance, I cannot get away from forcing my cadence into my writing, it is too subconscious--I know that that can sometimes lead to misunderstandings.

I hope, therefore, to continue this conversation, in forbearance towards each other.

Sincerely,

Thank you.

 

[Freth]

I am an old earth creationist. It is true that I have not rebuked my YEC brothers enough. But where YEC commits a sin, evolutionist are committing an unforgivable sin. Is that why it is my fault? Why do you judge brothers who sin and justify blasphemers who are unforgivable. While both are wrong, the ignorance of YECs do not change the very fabric of our understanding of God. While upholding evolution seeking to rewrite the Scriptures, the evolutionist usurping the authority of the bible with their knowledge.

Know this there is nothing wrong with belief of evolution as long as your keep it to yourself. But when you proclaim in the public square and scream to rewrite the Scriptures based on this "belief", there is no choice for a Christian and this is to condemn. Love God or Love the World.


Your logic is flawed. A killer is justified killing a thief, because the thief is a criminal also. A nation should launch their entire nuclear arsenal at a rogue nation because they exploded a pipe bomb in the capital. To cure the disease, you kill the patient.

Rebuke your brother for sinning, condemn the blasphemer for blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.

I don't think Christians should put stock in what science says about God's creation. God designed it. Shouldn't that be enough? Why do we have to read more into the creation account than what it says? Why do we have to prove X or Y? The knowledge of man puts roadblocks on the narrow path to heaven. We shouldn't concern ourselves with belief in evolution.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It's not me saying that, but many here seem feel to call us liars too, if you care to pursue this and other threads. One up there says he "I have not rebuked my YEC brothers enough." How very charitable of him.

Unfortunately, I haven't read every post from all other CF members, so I can't say that I've seen that comment you're referring to, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was made.

I'd rather not rebuke anyone and just discuss the respective positions that each of us fellow Christians have regarding the concept of evolution, whether we think its cogent or we don't.

For my part, and perhaps unlike some other evolutionists, I'm not looking for an opportunity to slap down fellow Christians who feel that YEC is a better, more faithful interpretive position. The only exception to this is if I feel I am attacked, I will defend my view. If I'm not attacked, then I'm not overly concerned which of several biblically based views that a fellow Christian supports.

Anyway, thank you for bringing your concern to my attention, sister coffee4u!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm not. You've misunderstood me.

I felt like you were, but after you denied it, I believed you.

Now, I'm in doubt--because this misunderstanding could've been clarified with a simple line of questioning; so, I'm in doubt now.

I understand.

For clarity: I meant all that I said, in the order I said it, and still mean all that I've said. You misconstrued my responses to mean that I was still accusing you, but I was not: I was simply repeating that condescension is not a bad thing, but with pride it is--that's what I initially thought about your first response, that it was condescension in pride, but after you denied it I believed you, tho I now doubt it.

--My standing in doubt of you, now, should not prevent our conversation.

Remember, pride is not an action, but condescension is: pride is a state of being, thus it can be hidden, but condescension cannot.

Very important to our conversation is the fact that I do not hold anything against you concerning any perceptions I may have about you, including my doubts, because I find such judging to be unrighteous under these circumstances, for after all, we are speaking here anonymously, and through a very restricted medium; therefore, I reserve my judgments, solely, for what you say with clarity, concerning our faith.

Moreover, please excuse my grammar and syntax, it is not conventional, but private: that idiocy of mine is born of necessity, because I lack a formal education, and English is a second language to me, thus my writing will include peculiarities that will tend to confusion, like, for instance, I cannot get away from forcing my cadence into my writing, it is too subconscious--I know that that can sometimes lead to misunderstandings.

I hope, therefore, to continue this conversation, in forbearance towards each other.

Sincerely,

Thank you.

Well, doubt away all you want then. I'll just continue being me, despite what any fellow Christian perceives about me. I'm not to worry about it any longer. With that, I'll back up to the next part of your previous posts.

 

[Thomas White]

The evidence shows how the world is now not how it was at creation. That world is gone. It changed first at the fall and again at the flood.

You are right. The world changed. It evolved.