Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[Bradskii]

The smart a*se student was believed to be Niels Bohr who won the Nobel Prize in physics for his work in quantum mechanics.

Another Bohr story: Apparently in his office he had a horse shoe nailed to the wall. Someone asked him about it and he said it brought luck. The person was astonished that Bohr would believe in simple superstitions. Bohr replied that it apparently was meant to work whether you believed in it or not.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes.

We'll be waiting, then.

 

[Bradskii]

Rocks naturally take millions of years to form but God can create them exactly the same way in no time which would give them the appearance of being millions of years old.

They actually don't. But that's not the point. A creationist cannot logically say 'Rocks naturally take millions of years to form'. Because you don't think that millions of years have ever existed. It's not possible for rocks to form over that period of time. You're making a statement that makes no sense.

What you are saying is that God made all the rocks 6,000 years ago. And if they looked 6,000 years old today I don't see what the problem would be. In a million years time they'll look 1,000,6000 years old. Again, I see no problem. But he decided to make them look like they're millions of years old.

That's deception. And that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's deception. And that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Can God make a dress tomorrow, so old it falls apart with age?

 

[ottawak]

Can God make a dress tomorrow, so old it falls apart with age?

Sure, but what would be the point? See, that's the question which isn't being answered. It is well withing God's power to have created the world 6000 years ago so that it appears to our best scientific scrutiny to be much older (or to contain "imbedded age" according to your version) but if that's what He did, why?

 

[AV1611VET]

Sure, but what would be the point? See, that's the question which isn't being answered. It is well withing God's power to have created the world 6000 years ago so that it appears to our best scientific scrutiny to be much older (or to contain "imbedded age" according to your version) but if that's what He did, why?

Because some things won't work without maturity.

In the example I gave, the dress wouldn't fall apart with age.

Raisin bread is another good example: it must contain processed grapes.

 

[ottawak]

Because some things won't work without maturity.

In the example I gave, the dress wouldn't fall apart with age.

Raisin bread is another good example: it must contain processed grapes.

Why create them that way? Why not just let them age naturally over time?

 

[Leaf473]

Looks like the subject of the Earth being created so as to look old has come up, and I say Cool! I love that subject.

A question that comes up for me is what was Adam like when he was created? Was he created as a baby, or as a middle-aged man? Or, as I like to think of it, as a teenager?

I know the objection of deception often comes up. But doesn't any kind of miracle involve some sort of deception? Like when Jesus turned water into wine, that liquid then had the appearance of something that had started out in a grape, been fermented, etc.

Is it still deception of God tells you what has happened?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why create them that way?

Well, if you're asking ME, then I think it's because nature can't configure this universe like it is today, no matter how much time God gave it.

To get nature to configure this universe like it is, God would have to guide her along (guided evolution).

In addition, He would have to change almost His entire sequence of creation events in Genesis 1.

And in addition, God couldn't pronounce His creation "very good," as He would have had to guide it through death and decay to get it configured to its present state.

 

[AV1611VET]

Looks like the subject of the Earth being created so as to look old has come up, and I say Cool! I love that subject.

A question that comes up for me is what was Adam like when he was created? Was he created as a baby, or as a middle-aged man? Or, as I like to think of it, as a teenager?

I think he was either twenty or thirty years old.

After all, he was given a job, given a wife, then told to have children: IN THAT ORDER.

I know the objection of deception often comes up. But doesn't any kind of miracle involve some sort of deception? Like when Jesus turned water into wine, that liquid then had the appearance of something that had started out in a grape, been fermented, etc.

Is it still deception of God tells you what has happened?

I make that point all the time.

God told us what He did, how He did it, where He did it, when He did it, what order He did it in, how long it took Him to do it, why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitnesses were.

And then people go and claim deception!

 

[BNR32FAN]

They actually don't. But that's not the point. A creationist cannot logically say 'Rocks naturally take millions of years to form'. Because you don't think that millions of years have ever existed. It's not possible for rocks to form over that period of time. You're making a statement that makes no sense.

• Chemical sedimentary rocks form by precipitation or the growth of new minerals in water. Correspondingly, how long does it take for igneous sedimentary and metamorphic rocks to form? As a very rough rule of thumb (with many exceptions) one could say that a typical duration for prograde metamorphism in a slowly subsiding basin or tectonic plate convergence, might be in the order of 20 to 30 million years .
• 
  https://askinglot.com/how-long-does-sedimentary-rock-take-to-form#:~:text=Chemical%20sedimentary%20rocks%20form%20by%20precipitation%20or%20the,order%20of%2020%20to%2030%20million%20years%20
• 
  Now igneous rocks can be formed in a matter of minutes thru volcanic activity but the majority of rocks are not igneous they are sedimentary and these are typically the rocks referred to by scientists to support their theory of how old the earth is.

 

[BNR32FAN]

They actually don't. But that's not the point. A creationist cannot logically say 'Rocks naturally take millions of years to form'. Because you don't think that millions of years have ever existed. It's not possible for rocks to form over that period of time. You're making a statement that makes no sense.

What you are saying is that God made all the rocks 6,000 years ago. And if they looked 6,000 years old today I don't see what the problem would be. In a million years time they'll look 1,000,6000 years old. Again, I see no problem. But he decided to make them look like they're millions of years old.

That's deception. And that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

It makes perfect sense for a God who is both omnipresent and omnipotent and it’s not deceptive at all when He specifically told everyone how long it took to create the earth and the universe. If people refuse to accept what He specifically said that their problem it doesn’t make God deceptive in the least.

 

[ottawak]

God told us what He did, how He did it, where He did it, when He did it, what order He did it in, how long it took Him to do it, why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitnesses were.

According to a dubious interpretation of an ancient Hebrew religios text.

 

[AV1611VET]

• Now igneous rocks can be formed in a matter of minutes thru volcanic activity but the majority of rocks are not igneous they are sedimentary and these are typically the rocks referred to by scientists to support their theory of how old the earth is.

Igneous rocks make me think of geologists taking a creation test:

 

[BNR32FAN]

Sure, but what would be the point? See, that's the question which isn't being answered. It is well withing God's power to have created the world 6000 years ago so that it appears to our best scientific scrutiny to be much older (or to contain "imbedded age" according to your version) but if that's what He did, why?

Scientists agree that it takes several million years for sedimentary rocks to form so what is impossible is for a sedimentary rock to appear to be 6,000 years old or a day old. So how do you create a sedimentary rock that appears to be made today or yesterday? You can’t do it in such a way that it would appear natural because the process takes millions of years. So it makes perfect sense that if God created rocks in a day that they would appear to be millions of years old on the day He created them since you can’t make a rock in a day that would appear to be made naturally.

 

[AV1611VET]

According to a dubious interpretation of an ancient Hebrew religios text.

I wouldn't know.

I'm dumber than a hay rake when it comes to reading and writing Hebrew.

 

[ottawak]

Scientists agree that it takes several million years for sedimentary rocks to form so what is impossible is for a sedimentary rock to appear to be 6,000 years old or a day old. So how do you create a sedimentary rock that appears to be made today or yesterday?

You can't, because if you created it that way it wouldn't be a sedimentary rock--it would be a rock which appeared to be a sedimentary rock. And you would have no sedimentary rocks made naturally to compare it to anyway because you believe the whoe process of making sedimentry rocks naturally described by science is a lie of the devil.

 

[ottawak]

I wouldn't know.

I'm dumber than a hay rake when it comes to reading and writing Hebrew.

That's OK, don't you believe that the Hebrew text of Genesis is a late translation from the Jacobean English of the original?

 

[AV1611VET]

You can't, because if you created it that way it wouldn't be a sedimentary rock--it would be a rock which appeared to be a sedimentary rock.

I can just see it now:

God creating a lava pit, and a scientist sticking his foot in it to disprove instant creation.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's OK, don't you believe that the Hebrew text of Genesis is a late translation from the Jacobean English of the original?

I believe the first ten chapters of Genesis were written in Jacobean English ... yes.