The content of the post is contrary to Christian theology, which is my point. You don't have to be Christian to be YEC. For instance, Jehovah's Witness is YEC, but not Christian. There are also Islamic YECers, such as Harun Yahya.
Upvote
0
Survival of the Fittest: An Interesting Side Effect of Death
- Thread starter SilenceInMotion
- Start date
Creationism has nothing to do with salvation of souls.
But yes, Creationism has been shown to be false and evolution has subsituted for it as the accepted scientific and theological position.
When you refer to "directions handed down" you point to one of the religious problems of creationism: it is concerned with the Bible, not with God. The Bible is not God.
Upvote
0
God has two books: scripture and Creation. Christians have always held that this is true. One of the problems of creationism is that it denies God as Creator by denying the book of Creation.
God is not required to put everything from one book into the other. Jesus' life is not in the book of Creation. Evolution, quantum mechanics, relativity, Boyle's laws on gasses, Kepler's laws of planetary orbits, Wolf's law, the Hardy-Weinberg Principle, Mendelian genetics, etc. are not in the Bible.
As to the lineage in Luke, look at the lineage in Matthew. Completely different. None of the ancestors of Jesus listed there are present in Luke's list. Those lists were never meant by the authors to be read literally. Instead, they are there to link Jesus to the House of David because Jewish beliefs were that the Messiah would come from that house. But in reality, neither the author of Luke nor the author of Matthew knew Jesus' lineage.
Upvote
0
- Sep 5, 2012
- 1,240
- 40
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
The thing that bothers me is that YECism is not just contradictory to the evidences of the theory of evolution specifically, but also to many other things away from science.
For example, with the amount of dinosaurs and whatnot that there were, why is it that it is so rarely spoken of in history if they were around a measly 4000 years ago?
Dinosaurs on Earth would be far more prevalent everywhere in earlier history, but it is not.
Arguments such as drawings or events about a dragon like creature and such do not suffice. It is prohibitively poor 'evidence' for YEC's.
People did not build fortifications to prevent such creatures from bombarding a village. They often lived right out in the open. How did nomads perservere when a monstrous Tyrannosaurus came around?
It's just not there in history. I will concede that maybe, by some extraordinary circumstance, a few ancient creatures somehow made it through the cracks. This is not unscientific- after all, there could be a megalodon out in the ocean somewhere or some other creature that sparked mystic lore in some cultures.
But all in all, YEC's just play a pointless game to convey a wishful idea.
For example, with the amount of dinosaurs and whatnot that there were, why is it that it is so rarely spoken of in history if they were around a measly 4000 years ago?
Dinosaurs on Earth would be far more prevalent everywhere in earlier history, but it is not.
Arguments such as drawings or events about a dragon like creature and such do not suffice. It is prohibitively poor 'evidence' for YEC's.
People did not build fortifications to prevent such creatures from bombarding a village. They often lived right out in the open. How did nomads perservere when a monstrous Tyrannosaurus came around?
It's just not there in history. I will concede that maybe, by some extraordinary circumstance, a few ancient creatures somehow made it through the cracks. This is not unscientific- after all, there could be a megalodon out in the ocean somewhere or some other creature that sparked mystic lore in some cultures.
But all in all, YEC's just play a pointless game to convey a wishful idea.
Upvote
0
Again, God has two books. This has us look only at a human interpretation of one of them.
Now, we are not making "assumptions" against the text. There are 2 creation stories in Genesis 1-3. Read literally, they contradict on nearly every detail. Thus, the Biblical text tells us we should not be reading them literally. Some people just don't really read the Bible but insist on reading it the way they want instead of listening to God.
The Bible is not God. What is more, we are not questioning "the Bible". We are questioning a human interpretation of that Bible. So, we can question a human interpretation of the Bible without putting God into trouble. In fact, it is that interpretation of the Bible that is creationism that gets God into trouble. It was that interpretation that God into so much trouble that evolution rescued God from creationism.
Back about 550 AD, a book came out called Christian Topography. Based on the Bible, it says the earth is flat! Do you believe the earth is flat? Why not? If you think the earth is round, you did not get that from the Bible. You got that from evidence outside the Bible, evidence from God's other book. You allow that other evidence to change your interpretation of the Bible.
Too bad you don't listen to that Holy Spirit.
Actually, creationism makes it a detriment to our salvation. Creationism tells us: either believe this particular interpretation of the Bible or believe what your eyes see. If you believe what you yourself see, then you can't believe in God. THAT is a detriment to salvation. But that is the position of creationism and Biblical literalism.
Yes, it is a shame that creationists miss out on the truth in this area. They miss out on how God created. Part of the shame of creationists is that they routinely break the 9th Commandment to push their Biblical literalism.
Look how clealy you state that this isn't about God. You aren't concerned about God. You say so clearly. You are concerned about "the word of God".
So you believe one of the "world's philosophies [sic]" that the Bible is always to be read literally. That's a "world's philosophy" that didn't really show up until 1890. And you fell for it. I'm so sorry, but the good news is that there is still time for you to come back to God.
But even God can't do that if His children don't listen to Him. You've thrown out one of His books and refuse to listen to the other one. Unless you change, you won't be able to get back to truth. Please change.
Upvote
0
When you read the Hebrew, you find that the "dust of the ground" and "man" are the same word.
"va.yi.tser a.do.nai e.lo.him et-ha.a.dam a.far min-ha.a.da.ma va.yi.pakh be.a.pav nish.mat kha.yim va.ye.hi ha.a.dam le.ne.fesh kha.ya Serve-A-Verse(tm)
(you will have to register at the site, but this is the best site I have found for transliterated Hebrew and English side by side)
So what we have here is not a "name" like Joe or Paul. That is, words that are used only as names in the language. What we have is Dirt. If we were really writing Genesis 2 in English, every place you see "Adam" it would be "Dirt". That tells you we are dealing with allegory.
Now, in Genesis 1:26-27 the first "man" was not made of dirt. Instead, God spoke men and women (both plural in Hebrew) into existence together. There was no "first man" in Genesis 1.
So? There's no word that the earth orbits the sun, either. God doesn't have to tell us about evolution in the Bible, just like He doesn't tell us the laws of thermodynamics in the Bible.
The creation stories are there to tell us the Who and why of creation. They are also there to tell us that there is only one God and that God is Creator of the universe. The main purpose of Genesis 1 is to tell us that the Babylonian religion is false. Genesis 2-3 tells us major parts of the Egyptian religion are false and tells us that ALL of us disobey God sometime. That's what Adam and Eve are for: to stand for all of us. EACH of us is tempted sometime in our life, and each of us (as represented by Adam and Eve) will follow temptation and disobey God.
The thing is, the creation stories were so successful at doing what they were meant to do that you don't even realize it anymore. Genesis 1 was so good at destroying the Babylonian pantheon that no one has believed in the Babylonian gods for at least 2,500 years! So now you read things into the stories that were never meant to be there and miss what God is telling you.
And again, your focus is on the Bible when you are supposed to be focussed on God. God doesn't have to tell us everything in the Bible! Don't you pray? Doesn't God talk to you in prayer? Hasn't God ever told you something in prayer that He has not told you in the Bible?
Similarly, God can and does tell us things in His Creation that He did not tell us in the Bible. Do you worship God or do you worship the Bible?
Upvote
0
Let me submit that it is more insidious and evil than that. YECs play the game because they worship the Bible. The Bible is their god and they play their "game" because what we find in God's Creation -- old earth, evolution, etc. -- shows their god to be false. They do what they do to preserve their false god and deny God.
Upvote
0
- Sep 5, 2012
- 1,240
- 40
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
And what's remarkable is that it is generally symmetrical to the theory of evolution.
First, there was water. Then, plants, then (non-plant) sea organisms, then land animals.
It's interesting that the Bible parallels the way it does with ToE, if only loosely. It is something ancient people would not have had any idea of whatsoever, and would demand a gigantic coincidence to say Genesis is not given by God.
But YEC's cannot appreciate the fact that Genesis was also intended for ancient people to understand, not just modern believers.
What creatoinists and atheist do is play tug of war, being on opposite ends of a sound truth.
The Big Bang is in Genesis- God created light before the Sun and stars. I interpret Genesis as a sort of 'codex'. Like you said, if taken literally, it just doesn't add up.
Upvote
0
A fern and frog have a common ancestor. Given the branching nature of speciation (see the diagram in Origin of Species, pg 90 of the 6th edition), once you have speciation, you will eventually get the difference between a frog and a fern. It's inevitable. Since the only biological reality is species, once you demonstrate speciation, you demonstrate the entirety of evolution. You may not have the specific pathways, but you have the inevitability of whatever distance and difference we see in living organisms.
And yes, we do have the evidence: phylogenetic analysis. The sequences of bases in the DNA of frogs and ferns are not independent observations, but are connected by historical connections: speciations thru time.
Upvote
0
I totally agree on the "Repent".
However, it's not quite the demiurge. Perhaps it is Marcionite?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
You have some strange exegesis. This has nothing to do with the divine, but rather the material world. God is creating day and night on the earth. It has nothing to with His nature.
Again a strange exegesis. And heresy. "darkness" here is ignorance of God or rejection of God. IT is not part of God. If you have the divine in parts and say that the "darkness" part does not comprehend the "light" part, you are saying that God is a split personality, where one personality can see the other, but the second cannot see the first. That makes God insane.
You are puttin lots of interpretations in this to get it to come out the way you want.
Satan is not "divine". You started out by saying "are two sides of the divine," In Christianity, there is only one "divine": God. Satan is a rebellious creature, not divine. Satan may be "immortal", but immortality does not make divinity. Angels are immortal. Do you consider them "divine"?
What you have here is heresy. I am not going to try to get you to change your beliefs, but please extend the same courtesy and do not try to force your beliefs on us as correct. Christianity has already rejected this view. God is purely light, as John 1:5 says. To split God into "light" and "darkness" is to go down the road of Gnosticism, Marcionism, and perhaps Arianism.
Upvote
0
Heresy again. When you say "Those Ones" you are into heresy. There is no "ones". There is only One.
Either Jehovah's Witness or Mormon, right? I'm thinking Mormon since they believe Jesus and God are 2 separate gods.
Upvote
0
Since this started with your reply to me, perhaps we had better revisit that:
lucaspa: That correction aside, what you are trying to say is correct: our classification scheme is simply groups of species. So, once you have speciation, you have all of evolution. Getting to a new genus, then a new family, then a new order, a new phylum, even a new kingdom is simply lots of speciation events spread out thru time. No mystery, but just the same processes that produce a new species from an existing one.
You: Bolded part is false. A fern is simply not a frog. You may be correct and that is certainly modern thought on the topic, but we really do not know that Ev actually "spread out" to such an extent. The evidence we have makes the idea plausible.
Now, the first sentence is a denial of my claims/argument. The second sentence is an argument against my claim in bold.
So yes, you are arguing. The argument continues after the comma in the 3rd sentence. You don't have to state that you are arguing; your statements show a disagreement and argument.
I will say that SilenceinMotion simply denied your disagreement without providing evidence. But in all fairness, your denial did not provide a cogent argument to the reasons I made the claim in bold in the first place. The small differences seen in a speciation accumulate. So, starting from a common ancestor and with enough speciation events within each lineage, it is inevitable that you are going to get the difference between fern and frog, or corn and cow, or kelp and whale. Whatever the morphological, physiologic, or genetic distance you care to name, the accumulation of the small differences between an original species and its "offspring" will produce that distance with enough speciations.
That this is indeed what has happened is confirmed by phylogenetic analysis.
Upvote
0
in principle, it is pointless to argue about such things when at the same time there are millions of humans in affliction/trouble/lack - the people need salvation/provision, not wiseacres, whence God and the humans hardly need a tedious evolution or whatever protraction, with regard to the lists of Jesus' genealogy, we can say that there is a difference as regards some names therein due to some reasons, e.g. it is possible some names to have been come from a different language, also, it is possible some of the ancestry to had more than one name, e.g. as it was in the case of Jacob who had another name "Israel", and in general it is possible there to be many features/peculiarities with the literal names, however the names in Luke 3:23-38 match up with the genealogical names in the books of old testament
Blessings
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
- Sep 5, 2012
- 1,240
- 40
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
The Fall heppened when our ancestors became human. Once we became fully credited by evolution to be like God, we had a short age of peace and then we went adversarial.
You probably don't know the backdrop details of the story of Adam and Eve that isn't mentioned in the Bible.
You see, Satan was in charge of 'Truth'. Adam and Eve would have never eaten from the tree because they didn't know deviance. The Serpent influenced them to do so.
Do you see how this can be applicable to the above? We were made like God, and we gained knowledge of good and evil. That's what caused mankind to be adversarial.
There is much more to be gained from Scripture when you stop reading it so literally. I don't see creationists taking Revelations literally, so why do it with Genesis? The Bible fades in, and then it fades out.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
you are right about the fact that the faith must be in God, and yet in That One Who really is the only true God, because until now there were many false, moreover in many wrong spiritual directions which were popularized as right
Mark 11:22 "Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God."
1 Corinthians 11:3-4 "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him."
however there is no so need to ask God about anything as to ask (from) Him to provide complete salvation and life for the humans, therefore it is written that "God is love", because the purpose of the faith is (it) to be used for the sake of overall salvation
1 Corinthians 12:7 "the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal(ie for overall benefit)."
Blessings
Last edited:
Upvote
0
John 9:4-5 "I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world."
the "night" in Genesis 1:5 is the already limited "darkness", because God has limited it, otherwise the "darkness" could cause greater damages
if until now there was no evil, how would it exist?!, how would eve and adam be tempted/beguiled if there was no an evil spirit?!, and if even satan was an angel of God, how would he dropped out if there was no whatever evil substance in the universe which to make him proud?!
Romans 14:14 "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.",
1 Timothy 4:4 "For every creature(or: every creation) of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving(ie if it be used for good purpose(-s)):"
Blessings
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
we are not mormons, neither followers of the so called denomination "jehovah's witnesses", but we believe only in That One Who really is the only true God of the universe
1 John 5:20 "we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life."
Blessings
Upvote
0
Similar threads
