Bible-Creation-Evolution (2)

[Nathan Poe]

Ah, now you are reduced to word games. Are you trying to get out of a tough spot by being silly?

Never takes him long, does it?

 

[Nathan Poe]

If last Thursday was 6100 years ago, you are correct.

And if last Thursday was 4.5 billion years ago?

 

[Nostromo]

What precludes a situation where God wrote the documentation and the seller tries to pass it off as the paperwork for a different car?

AV?

 

[TheReasoner]

As the Bible says, faith is the evidence of things not seen, and you guys certainly demonstrate that.

Only, it IS seen AV. Clearly. If you're blind, does that mean everyone else is as well?

 

[1611AV]

Only, it IS seen AV. Clearly. If you're blind, does that mean everyone else is as well?

What is seen? Can you show me any evolution? Can I go outside and see something evolving? Every single thing is as the same as it was when my grandfather was a child. And his and so on.

The Scriptures speak of creation of Man and plants and fowl, fish and so on... Why no story on evolution as a way of creating? He says he spoke and it was. And after he spoke the creation into exsistance, he saw His creation and it was so and good.

If everything came from a single cell type of thing originally, why the need for Him to be specific about Man, plants , fish, cattle, ect... all on different days. Would not He need only one day to make one original "common ancestor" and then let "nature" take its course???

If he continued to create throughout the 6 days as the scripture says then, it is not evolution. It's creation only. And not only creation but specific creation.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

 

[TheReasoner]

What is seen? Can you show me any evolution? Can I go outside and see something evolving? Every single thing is as the same as it was when my grandfather was a child. And his and so on.

You can take a biotechnology course or a biology course and you'll learn what to look for and how to look. Some processes take time. For example if you make a statue out of pure gold and let it stand still for many many years gravity will deform it. You will not live to see it, but eventually it will be pretty much shaped as a puddle. Mountains rise and erode away. Does the need for more time than a human lifespan negate the processes? Can we not see the processes and indeed the result of these processes if we but look?
How come you think we can do so in every field but biology?

The Scriptures speak of creation of Man and plants and fowl, fish and so on... Why no story on evolution as a way of creating? He says he spoke and it was. And after he spoke the creation into exsistance, he saw His creation and it was so and good.

If everything came from a single cell type of thing originally, why the need for Him to be specific about Man, plants , fish, cattle, ect... all on different days. Would not He need only one day to make one original "common ancestor" and then let "nature" take its course???

If he continued to create throughout the 6 days as the scripture says then, it is not evolution. It's creation only. And not only creation but specific creation.

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

And tell me, is time for God the same as it is for man?

 

[AV1611VET]

Only, it IS seen AV.

Then why are they called missing links?

Clearly.

To whom? you? you've seen these missing links?

If you're blind, does that mean everyone else is as well?

No, if I'm blind, that means I'm blind.

 

[AV1611VET]

You can take a biotechnology course or a biology course and you'll learn what to look for and how to look.

And apparently we'll learn what to take for granted as well?

The thing is, God can be in one of those steps taken for granted, can't he?

Has it occurred to you that some believe a "link" is missing because it should never be there in the first place?

 

[TheReasoner]

And apparently we'll learn what to take for granted as well?

There are always certain assumptions that - in early courses - you need to take for granted. Principles and processes that are complex and simplified to make sense in an early course.

But no. If something's origin is not known or some process is not known then you are encouraged to research it and help discovering how things happen. If you manage you might get very famous, depending on what process we're talking about.

AV, science isn't about blind acceptance like your version of Christianity is. It's about finding out what's behind everything else. Taking for granted is... Frowned upon.

The thing is, God can be in one of those steps taken for granted, can't he?

And if He is or isn't, does that have any influence on whether we can explain the process? God's influence does not have to be mystic and unexplainable. He made this universe, and the laws that make it what it is. It seems asinine to think he wouldn't use His own creation, and indeed He does.

Has it occurred to you that some believe a "link" is missing because it should never be there in the first place?

*sigh* the whole missing link argument is so far out there it's beyond the horizon. AV, if you observe the spaces between letters does that mean there is no coherent word because the letters are separated? If you observe a movie and look at one picture after another, does the missing gaps between each frame mean there is no coherent movie?

 

[TheReasoner]

Then why are they called missing links?

To whom? you? you've seen these missing links?

Are you aware how unlikely the fossilization of a creature is? And how unlikely the survival of said fossilized creature for millions of years is?

Can you see the constituent parts of an atom? Can you even see an atom? (You can, after a fashion, but I expect you'd say 'no') Do you then doubt the existence of it? How about the wind? Radiowaves?

 

[AV1611VET]

*sigh* the whole missing link argument is so far out there it's beyond the horizon.

Maybe for you -- but to me, it isn't.

Again, why are they called 'missing links'?

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you aware how unlikely the fossilization of a creature is?

No, and I don't care.

And how unlikely the survival of said fossilized creature for millions of years is?

No, and I don't care.

Can you see the constituent parts of an atom?

No, and I don't care.

Can you even see an atom?

No, and I don't need to.

(You can, after a fashion, but I expect you'd say 'no')

Correct

Do you then doubt the existence of it?

No, and we're off the subject.

How about the wind? Radiowaves?

How about missing mutations that prevent you guys from daisy-chaining man back to the Sea of Goop?

 

[1611AV]

You can take a biotechnology course or a biology course and you'll learn what to look for and how to look. Some processes take time. For example if you make a statue out of pure gold and let it stand still for many many years gravity will deform it. You will not live to see it, but eventually it will be pretty much shaped as a puddle. Mountains rise and erode away. Does the need for more time than a human lifespan negate the processes? Can we not see the processes and indeed the result of these processes if we but look?
How come you think we can do so in every field but biology?

And tell me, is time for God the same as it is for man?

When God was made flesh, he existed in time as well as eternity.

John 12:27 Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this HOUR: but for this cause came I unto this HOUR.

1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the MYSTERY of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[1611AV]

Maybe for you -- but to me, it isn't.

Again, why are they called 'missing links'?

Actually, there should be billions of fossils or bones of "missing links" We have mammoth flesh and bones and now we have t-Rex flesh found preserved. I brought my kids to the museum last year and they had a hugh assortment of bones and fossils of things they said existed millions of years ago. Surely we must be able to find at least one example of our "missing link"... No?

This must be extremely frustrating for evolutionists.

 

[TheReasoner]

No, and I don't care.

No, and I don't care.

No, and I don't care.

No, and I don't need to.

Correct

No, and we're off the subject.

How about missing mutations that prevent you guys from daisy-chaining man back to the Sea of Goop?

So you don't know, and you don't care. Even so you want to criticize as if you held multiple doctorates in multiple fields. Do you think that's commendable?

 

[Koizito]

One word for you, AV: Archaeopteryx...
I think more transitional than that is quite difficult...
But, as you said, you don't care, right?

 

[mzungu]

Actually, there should be billions of fossils or bones of "missing links" We have mammoth flesh and bones and now we have t-Rex flesh found preserved. I brought my kids to the museum last year and they had a hugh assortment of bones and fossils of things they said existed millions of years ago. Surely we must be able to find at least one example of our "missing link"... No?

This must be extremely frustrating for evolutionists.

Yeas dear! Some tea perhaps?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeekypzUWF4

 

[TheReasoner]

When God was made flesh, he existed in time as well as eternity.

I note you didn't answer my question.

 

[Matthijs]

Maybe for you -- but to me, it isn't.

Again, why are they called 'missing links'?

Good question. They are not missing at all. We have so many that we actually have skulls that we cannot classify - they share traits with 2 different groups of hominids, and we don't know if we are to call them an early example of the older one, or a late example of the early one.

 

[Tiberius]

What is seen? Can you show me any evolution? Can I go outside and see something evolving?

yes. I can show you a species evolving.

Look HERE for a list of both plants and animals that have evolved into new species and have been observed doing so by people.