Noah way?

[Shemjaza]

"Creation Scientist" is a contradiction in terms.

Agreed as tasks and activities... but as separate labels they can absolutely apply to an individual.

 

[David Lamb]

"Creation Scientist" is a contradiction in terms.

Why? Are you saying that people who believe in Creation cannot be scientists? Those scientists associated with Creationist organisations such as "Answers in Genesis" would disagree, as would I.

 

[Shemjaza]

Not recent. The last and only worldwide flood was a few thousand years ago, exactly as
Described in sufficient detail in God's Newspaper.

That's recent.

The scientific evidence against that being true is overwhelming.

As I always say, it is trivial to imagine an omnipotent God miraculously flooding the world, then reworking the environment into a completely different structure... but it left no physical evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why? Are you saying that people who believe in Creation cannot be scientists? Those scientists associated with Creationist organisations such as "Answers in Genesis" would disagree, as would I.

I understand that there are Christians who are scientists who study God's creation.

And in that vein, they would be creation [studying] scientists.

But ... if they want to apply what they are studying back to the Creation Week, then I'm going to have to call them on it.

Science has nothing to do with the Creation Week, as the creation week involved a series of one miracle after another after another.

And I don't agree with their terminology.

It's misleading, in my opinion.

 

[AV1611VET]

So it seems is "Christian Forums" by the same logic ?

No.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yawn, really? All of Genesis eliminates needing anything at all, everything, every purpose, of this thread; almost of this whole forum.

Then feel free to tell us how the animals got back to their points of origination after the Flood.

 

[AV1611VET]

As I always say, it is trivial to imagine an omnipotent God miraculously flooding the world, then reworking the environment into a completely different structure... but it left no physical evidence.

What you call "reworking the environment," I like to call "cleaning up His mess."

 

[FredVB]

I think there are just different things looked at as evidence. This does not mean there is claim of knowledge about how long ago things happened, from what is found.

Noah's way was not with having animals killed for food, but for when the ark was left there was hardly anything around to eat, God then permitted what would come into their hand they could kill for preparing, to have food they needed, just after all the blood was removed. Blood from creatures was not permitted. For that matter, neither were mushrooms.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think there are just different things looked at as evidence. This does not mean there is claim of knowledge about how long ago things happened, from what is found.

Noah's way was not with having animals killed for food, but for when the ark was left there was hardly anything around to eat, God then permitted what would come into their hand they could kill for preparing, to have food they needed, just after all the blood was removed. Blood from creatures was not permitted. For that matter, neither were mushrooms.

That's not even remotely close to what the OP topic of the thread is about.

 

[BeyondET]

What you call "reworking the environment," I like to call "cleaning up His mess."

Hmm God is messy?

 

[AV1611VET]

Hmm God is messy?

I'd say so.

 

[BeyondET]

I'd say so.

Then you think He isn't perfect either, there is no perfection in a mess.

 

[FredVB]

That's not even remotely close to what the OP topic of the thread is about.

I think it was, I answer things I can. What specifically was asked I do not have an answer for. So what. I have the answer for how the universe started, you atheists do not.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think it was, I answer things I can. What specifically was asked I do not have an answer for. So what. I have the answer for how the universe started, you atheists do not.

I'm a deist, so check that first of all.

And secondly... no, none of what you said had anything to do with the OP topic in the slightest.

 

[AV1611VET]

... there is no perfection in a mess.

You don't play chess, do you?

 

[FredVB]

I'm a deist, so check that first of all.

And secondly... no, none of what you said had anything to do with the OP topic in the slightest.

Regardless...
You are with those who argue against God being relevant to anything about evolution. That there is no explanation for the universe being started other than unlimited necessary existence that is eternal and showing intelligence and caring, which would rightly be called God, means that there is such involvement with design even in any evolution happening. Atheism does not have an answer for that, with any logic. What I posted is an answer that can be given, so if I can't have a thought out answer to the original question about placement of animals, so what? It is really smaller potatoes.

If it desired that I just make guesses to explain placement of animals for being considered relevant I could do so, but why should that be? Are guesses really wanted? There is no vested interest there.

 

[BeyondET]

You don't play chess, do you?

You could of fooled me, calling God messy

 

[AV1611VET]

You could of fooled me, calling God messy

Read the Bible, chief.

God makes necessary messes.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

 

[BeyondET]

Read the Bible, chief.

God makes necessary messes.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

No where does it say a mess, understand what it is saying hoss.

 

[AV1611VET]

No where does it say a mess, understand what it is saying hoss.

Would you recognize a mess, if you saw it?

Can you tell me what this picture represents?

Or this?

In addition, have you read the book of Revelation?