suppose Darwin deeply wrong

MrsFoundit · Mar 5, 2020

Jonathan Walkerin said:
So how is that different from any other explanation you might dream up to make sense of the genesis ?

I cannot think of any way to interpret it that could not be subject to this question.

Jonathan Walkerin said:
You think it makes more sense then the official explanation so you take it ?

What official explanation?

Jonathan Walkerin said:
Until someone comes up with a better solution ..... like you know scientific methods ?

See my signature.

coffee4u · Mar 5, 2020

Jonathan Walkerin said:
Really ? What was he talking about ? He did not just say people should rest which is fine , we poor feeble things need it.

Why would God rest ? Remember we are being earnest and literal here. So tell me why and how would it even be possible for someone that is forever in perfect state and unchangeable ?

Go read my earlier post where I answered this question.

coffee4u · Mar 5, 2020

KomatiiteBIF said:
"And who said they lived 60 million years ago? Fallible men who weren't there, didn't see and don't know everything, but who assume they know everything. Why believe them over scripture?" -cofee4u

This is like asking "and who said there was an ice age in the past, or that dinosaurs lived and walked?"

Fallible men who weren't there and didn't see them.

It's quite silly. Obviously we do not need a time machine to understand events of the past based on evidence.

Any one of us can look at the evidence and can conclude some 10+ independent ice ages. We can also see evidence of dinosaurs having lived.

And if we see things like oceanic trans and regresive sequences with animal tracks, burrows and nests in between, we can collectively form a series of events that logically couldn't occur in just a few thousand years.

We don't need a time machine, we have God's word. Either it's trustworthy or it's not. If anything goes against the Bible I choose to believe the Bible. Those men, no matter how clever are just fallible men.

The Bible says land animals were made on day 6. Job talks about 2 of them. No mystery. Just regular animals that died.

"we can collectively form a series of events that logically couldn't occur in just a few thousand years."

Really and who again told you this? Secular science.

Alternative Views
Dinosaur and mammal tracks found together - creation.com
Dinosaur Fossils Found in Marine Rocks...Again

If everyone agreed we wouldn't be having this argument.

LoG · Mar 5, 2020

coffee4u said:
The Scofield Bible is heresy.
Scofield Lies - Let God Be True!

I get antsy when christians start calling each other liars because they have differing viewpoints or interpretations. Just doesn't strike me as being a Spirit led accusation.

Job 33:6 · Mar 5, 2020

coffee4u said:
Really and who again told you this? Secular science.

Basic logic and reason. Glaciers only move so fast. So if we have 10 glacial advances and retreats, we might expect such a process to unfold over thousands of years.

And if below those ice ages we have 5 oceanic trans and regressive sequences, in conjunction with compressional faulting, we have thousands and millions of years more. Physics only allows rocks to move so fast before they crumble or melt.

And if between those oceanic transgressions, we have animal tracks, feeding traces, nests and complex burrow networks, then we logically know that many years passed between transgressions. Life lived, walked, ate, bred etc.

And if we see double overturned angular unconformities, marked by slicken sides, fault gouge, more trace fossil burrows and cataclastic deformation, all below the oceanic trans and regressive sequences, then we know that millions of years further passed, because rock only hardens and is deposited only so fast. And rock only moves so fast according to basic physics. A

if animals are burrowing into the layers before they harden, that takes time. It takes time for the layers to then harden. Time for the layers to become orogenically tilted, time for those hard layers to erode to grade, time for new layers to be deposited, time for life to live and walk in those new soft layers, time for those new layers to harden, time for those new layers to be tilted, time for further new layers to be deposited on top, and so forth.

Young earthers tend to believe in a pre-flood world of just 2-3000 years. But the above events just cannot unfold in such a brief amount of time. Not by any logic or reason.

The green River formation had over 5+ million laminations. The formation is also shaped like a prehistoric freshwater lake. It's geochemistry indicates a fresh water origin, as does it's Flora and fauna.

5 million varves cannot form in 2,000 years by anyone's logic or reason. Some Creationists alleged that the varves are from waves of a global flood, but waves are not oval/lake shaped, nor do waves make deposits that look like a prehistoric lake.

It isn't modern science that teaches us that young earth creation doesn't make sense. It's just common knowledge that young earth views don't make any sense.

coffee4u · Mar 5, 2020

KomatiiteBIF said:
Basic logic and reason. Glaciers only move so fast. So if we have 10 glacial advances and retreats, we might expect such a process to unfold over thousands of years.

And if below those ice ages we have 5 oceanic trans and regressive sequences, in conjunction with compressional faulting, we have thousands and millions of years more. Physics only allows rocks to move so fast before they crumble or melt.

And if between those oceanic transgressions, we have animal tracks, feeding traces, nests and complex burrow networks, then we logically know that many years passed between transgressions. Life lived, walked, ate, bred etc.

And if we see double overturned angular unconformities, marked by slicken sides, fault gouge, more trace fossil burrows and cataclastic deformation, all below the oceanic trans and regressive sequences, then we know that millions of years further passed, because rock only hardens and is deposited only so fast. And rock only moves so fast according to basic physics. A

if animals are burrowing into the layers before they harden, that takes time. It takes time for the layers to then harden. Time for the layers to become orogenically tilted, time for those hard layers to erode to grade, time for new layers to be deposited, time for life to live and walk in those new soft layers, time for those new layers to harden, time for those new layers to be tilted, time for further new layers to be deposited on top, and so forth.

Young earthers tend to believe in a pre-flood world of just 2-3000 years. But the above events just cannot unfold in such a brief amount of time. Not by any logic or reason.

The green River formation had over 5+ million laminations. The formation is also shaped like a prehistoric freshwater lake. It's geochemistry indicates a fresh water origin, as does it's Flora and fauna.

5 million varves cannot form in 2,000 years by anyone's logic or reason. Some Creationists alleged that the varves are from waves of a global flood, but waves are not oval/lake shaped, nor do waves make deposits that look like a prehistoric lake.

It isn't modern science that teaches us that young earth creation doesn't make sense. It's just common knowledge that young earth views don't make any sense.

Some YEC do yes, but not all of us. Not all of us use or agree with James Ussurs's timeline or that the Bible should be used in such a fashion. While I believe the creation is some thousands of years old I am not held to 6 or 10 thousand. It doesn't bother me if it is 20 or longer. What I don't agree with is millions of years or evolution from one cell to primate to man or dinosaurs turning into birds or any of the rest of that nonsense. Most of what we see is a direct result of the global flood.

coffee4u · Mar 6, 2020

LoG said:
I get antsy when christians start calling each other liars because they have differing viewpoints or interpretations. Just doesn't strike me as being a Spirit led accusation.

1 John 4:1
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

James 3:1
Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

Ephesians 5:11
Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

Cyrus Scofield claimed to be a teacher, someone who could guide the flock. As such he put himself in a position where he will not only be tested against scripture but be held accountable.
There are plenty of things said about him and his writings.
What was Wrong with C. I. Scofield? |
Heresies in the Scofield Bible Series | SermonAudio
Scofield Bible Exposed

Jonathan Walkerin · Mar 6, 2020

coffee4u said:
Go read my earlier post where I answered this question.

No you did not. You just rambled about other stuff. Fair enough, there is no literal answer to the question anyway so you would only admit your position was a failure.

coffee4u · Mar 6, 2020

Jonathan Walkerin said:
No you did not. You just rambled about other stuff. Fair enough, there is no literal answer to the question anyway so you would only admit your position was a failure.

As I will continue to say, scripture interprets scripture. That is how the full meaning of any passage is discovered. You asked a question about God's rest so I looked up supporting scripture. If that is what you consider 'rambling' don't ask me because other scripture is what you will get.

Jok · Mar 6, 2020

Oscarr said:
The important thing to me is that I fully believe the first two chapters of Genesis to be the true way that God created the universe out of nothing in six 24 hour days. It is very straightforward to me.

Precisely! Supposing that the original audience knew absolutely nothing about astrophysics, God would have given the concept of creation to them exactly as you suggest, very straightforward for them!

Jonathan Walkerin · Mar 6, 2020

coffee4u said:
As I will continue to say, scripture interprets scripture. That is how the full meaning of any passage is discovered

That sentence is pretty much meaningless since it is you who is doing the interpretion.

You are just jumping from one place of the scripture to another comparing stuff then drawing your own conclusions according to your prejudices, discarding everything that does not fit your narrow vision then proclaiming "Scripture interprets scripture".

Futile, useless and waste of time.

Job 33:6 · Mar 6, 2020

coffee4u said:
Some YEC do yes, but not all of us. Not all of us use or agree with James Ussurs's timeline or that the Bible should be used in such a fashion. While I believe the creation is some thousands of years old I am not held to 6 or 10 thousand. It doesn't bother me if it is 20 or longer. What I don't agree with is millions of years or evolution from one cell to primate to man or dinosaurs turning into birds or any of the rest of that nonsense. Most of what we see is a direct result of the global flood.

Even 20 thousand years isn't nearly enough to fit in the features I've described. Not by anyone's logic. You're welcome to take the features I described above and to try to fit them on a 20,000 year timeline to see if it makes any sense.

With the overturned unconformity, also consider that if rocks are subjected to too much heat or pressure, they metamorphose. So in tilting strata, you can only tilt it so fast. And keep in mind how long it takes for water and wind to erode rock away. Place too much pressure on a formation and it will break rather than erode. Move the formations against each other too fast an they will brecciated rather than conglomerate. Consider the time it takes for those 5 million lake shaped deposits to form. Consider the time it takes for tracks to form in between those further. Consider the time for the multiple ice ages. Consider the time for those oceanic trans and regressive sequences.

Logically, we really can't even begin to imagine how many millions of years these events would take to unfold.

Well actually we now can get an idea with computer modeling. It would take hundreds of millions of years.

Certainly not just a few smeasly thousand years.

MrsFoundit · Mar 6, 2020

KomatiiteBIF said:
Logically, we really can't even begin to imagine how many millions of years these events would take to unfold.

Well actually we now can get an idea with computer modeling. It would take hundreds of millions of years.

Certainly not just a few smeasly thousand years.

Do you know how any of it was left right after being created?

Job 33:6 · Mar 6, 2020

MrsFoundit said:
Do you know how any of it was left right after being created?

Why what was left? Evidence of history?

I would guess the same reason why footprints are left behind after I walk through snow. It's just the nature of creation to bear scars of the past.

Job 33:6 · Mar 6, 2020

MrsFoundit said:
Do you know how any of it was left right after being created?

Oh sorry, how any was left right after creation?

Well, I study the earth, not really astronomy. The universe, as far as we are aware, has existed far longer than the earth. The question of what creation or what earth (or a lack thereof) was like 10 billion years ago, is a question better suited for space people. Although we can of course use telescopes to look back into the past and can examine young stars and galaxies far older than our own.

coffee4u · Mar 6, 2020

KomatiiteBIF said:
Oh sorry, how any was left right after creation?

Well, I study the earth, not really astronomy. The universe, as far as we are aware, has existed far longer than the earth. The question of what creation or what earth (or a lack thereof) was like 10 billion years ago, is a question better suited for space people. Although we can of course use telescopes to look back into the past and can examine young stars and galaxies far older than our own.

You are so drawn into evolution and science that you do not even understand the question.

You are being asked how did God shape and leave the earth after creation.

And I will add, how was it left and shaped after the global flood?

Job 33:6 · Mar 7, 2020

coffee4u said:
You are so drawn into evolution and science that you do not even understand the question.

You are being asked how did God shape and leave the earth after creation.

And I will add, how was it left and shaped after the global flood?

Then question #135 was an accurate response. And of course there was no global flood.

coffee4u · Mar 7, 2020

KomatiiteBIF said:
And of course there was no global flood.

The Bible says there was.
Genesis 7:4
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”

Genesis 7:21-23
21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

Isaiah 54:9 New International Version (NIV)
9 “To me this is like the days of Noah,
when I swore that the waters of Noah would never again cover the earth.
So now I have sworn not to be angry with you,
never to rebuke you again.

Luke 17:26-27
26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.

Not local but world wide.

Paul James · Apr 18, 2020

coffee4u said:
The Bible says there was.
Genesis 7:4
4 Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”

Genesis 7:21-23
21 Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. 23 Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark.

Isaiah 54:9 New International Version (NIV)
9 “To me this is like the days of Noah,
when I swore that the waters of Noah would never again cover the earth.
So now I have sworn not to be angry with you,
never to rebuke you again.

Luke 17:26-27
26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.

Not local but world wide.

The problem is that there is an increasing attack on the authority of the Bible, even amongst professing Christians. The main opposition to Creation Evangelists has come from Christians and pastors who hold to theistic evolution, or progressive creation as many call it. The sad thing about this is that we either accept the literal words of the Bible as authoritative in every part of it, or we treat it as just a religious book that has no authority over us at all. A gospel preacher would not be able to say to his listeners, "You must be born again" because without the backing of an authoritative Bible, they are just meaningless words. It also means that the Ten Commandments have no authority, and that "anything goes" in the way people choose to live their lives, and that they can be free to adopt any interpretation that suits them, and they can believe in a God they feel comfortable with. People will just choose their own standards of morality, fulfilling the Scripture:
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death" (Proverbs 14:12).

Tom 1 · Apr 18, 2020

Paul James said:
The problem is that there is an increasing attack on the authority of the Bible, even amongst professing Christians. The main opposition to Creation Evangelists has come from Christians and pastors who hold to theistic evolution, or progressive creation as many call it. The sad thing about this is that we either accept the literal words of the Bible as authoritative in every part of it, or we treat it as just a religious book that has no authority over us at all. A gospel preacher would not be able to say to his listeners, "You must be born again" because without the backing of an authoritative Bible, they are just meaningless words. It also means that the Ten Commandments have no authority, and that "anything goes" in the way people choose to live their lives, and that they can be free to adopt any interpretation that suits them, and they can believe in a God they feel comfortable with. People will just choose their own standards of morality, fulfilling the Scripture:
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death" (Proverbs 14:12).

Quite the reverse, the problem is that unless thinking, responsible adults take it upon themselves to properly understand the bible they will continue to believe anything some equally ignorant person in the pulpit tells them is true.

suppose Darwin deeply wrong

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Optimistic sceptic

Similar threads