Do Baptists appear to be intellectually challenged baboons...?

Hupomone10 · Jan 19, 2011

PrincetonGuy said:
We have massive amounts of evidence that support of the theory of evolution, and the amount of the evidence is rapidly growing. What evidence do you have that the new heavens and the new earth will evolve over a period of millions of years?

Following the same logic. Merely being consistent. You have said that the evidence for the first creation is already there - "mountains of evidence." Darwin had none of this mountain of evidence you refer to that has been amassed supporting his theory, yet he had the vision to launch out and say that he was confident it would be found, that they would indeed find transitional forms in the fossil record, which have been found in abundance, right?

Use the same vision and launch out in it and propose that the new creation will come about the same way.

If a sovereign God chose to create the first creation in millions if not billions of years through natural processes, then it is only logical that He will follow the same rules and techniques to create the second earth, the new earth. Why would you believe differently, when there is such a mountain of evidence that the first creation was done this way? As a matter of fact, it would be very inconsistent for Him to do otherwise.

Maybe the new heaven and new earth is simply coming about as quickly as it can. Maybe we are becoming "new creations" simply as quickly as we can, by natural processes.

Blessings,
H.

Mikecpking · Jan 19, 2011

sealacamp said:
You didn't ask this?

You say you didn't ask and state that it was a comment, but it sure looks just like a question to me, and one that is designed to discredit the validity of Gods word, again. Obviously you are determined to make it what you wish it to be, just like some other folks are. So go right ahead and change what ever you wish, I'll keep mine just as it is written.

Equally there is massive evidence to refute your supposed evidence. However you won't accept it as your mind has already been made up against what God has said. In the end it won't go anywhere accept with those that are looking for a way to usurp God and His word.

Sealacamp

Hi Seal,
What tangeable evidence is there for a 6,000 year old earth?
For me, the biblical flood can be explained by massive flood events with the melting ice at the end of the last ice age where sea levels rose 400 feet and the land where the ice was upon was pressed down much lower than there current levels (and still rising) today.
We all believe God created the earth, the universe and everything, but he chose to do it over billions of years which is what we observe today.

PrincetonGuy · Jan 19, 2011

Hupomone10 said:
Following the same logic. Merely being consistent. You have said that the evidence for the first creation is already there - "mountains of evidence." Darwin had none of this mountain of evidence you refer to that has been amassed supporting his theory, yet he had the vision to launch out and say that he was confident it would be found, that they would indeed find transitional forms in the fossil record, which have been found in abundance, right?

Use the same vision and launch out in it and propose that the new creation will come about the same way.

If a sovereign God chose to create the first creation in millions if not billions of years through natural processes, then it is only logical that He will follow the same rules and techniques to create the second earth, the new earth. Why would you believe differently, when there is such a mountain of evidence that the first creation was done this way? As a matter of fact, it would be very inconsistent for Him to do otherwise.

Maybe the new heaven and new earth is simply coming about as quickly as it can. Maybe we are becoming "new creations" simply as quickly as we can, by natural processes.

Blessings,
H.

You have misquoted me. I did not use the expression, mountains of evidence. Furthermore, your logic is faulty because Darwin observed a huge amount of evidence of evolution through natural selection before he realized the significance of the evidence and formulated his theory.

Hupomone10 · Jan 20, 2011

PrincetonGuy said:
You have misquoted me. I did not use the expression, mountains of evidence. Furthermore, your logic is faulty because Darwin observed a huge amount of evidence of evolution through natural selection before he realized the significance of the evidence and formulated his theory.

Please forgive me. "Massive amounts of evidence."

We have massive amounts of evidence that support of the theory of evolution,

I appreciate that it is your opinion that my logic is faulty, but it is my opinion that it is not. Yes, Darwin observed what he saw as huge amounts of evidence of natural selection; and I didn't say he didn't. What he didn't find, and correct me if I'm wrong, is evidence of transitional forms, partly formed between species.

But he formed his theory anyway. He had the vision and looked to the future expecting that they would be found to prove his theory.

If I am not wrong, if Darwin didn't find those transitional forms, then my logic is not faulty.

Also, it is never faulty logic to expect Someone to perform a second creation, such as a new heaven and new earth, the same way He did in the first creation.

That is my contention, and that is what I'm pointing out, in case it was missed. No one that I'm aware of believes that God will create the new earth and heavens by evolution over millions of years. And yet they don't see the inconsistency in believing He did so the first time and will change the second time.

I am merely pointing out the faulty thinking that believes God would create the first time using only natural processes over millions of years, but in the second re-creation use miraculous processes, a process that they don't believe He used the first time.

This is, IMHO, the ultimate in faulty logic and thinking, and it comes from having our thought patterns formed by the wisdom of man instead of by God's Word.

There is an answer for this: it is by renewing the mind constantly and consistently with a steady diet of power passages from His word. Soon your thoughts begin to be conformed to His thoughts; and you look back on the former way you thought and it amazes you that you ever thought that way. It is not a matter of becoming blind, but of seeing more clearly than ever. This is the process of renewing of the mind. This is the process of growth.

Blessings,
H.

sealacamp · Jan 20, 2011

What tangeable evidence is there for a 6,000 year old earth?

Now you are putting words in my mouth. Show me one place where I have ever even remotely stated anything like that, ever!

What I have said is this:

Psalm 90:4

For you, a thousand years are as a passing day, as brief as a few night hours.

And

2 Peter 3:8
But you must not forget this one thing, dear friends: A day is like a thousand years to the Lord, and a thousand years is like a day.

I have said this and this only, many many times, God exists outside of time so who knows how long creation took. People can claim to know how long God spent creating the universe but no one really knows, only God does. The point that you keep drifting away from is that God created all that there is while current evolutionists seek to find a way to explain creation without God. You want to get side tracked with irrelevant issues. If God wanted to spend one minute making all that there is or a trillion years what is that to us? He can do anything He chooses and He created all that there is, period.

Sealacamp

Hammster · Jan 20, 2011

I have said this and this only, many many times, God exists outside of time so who knows how long creation took.

I do. Genesis 1. Six days. See also the Ten Commandments.

DeaconDean · Jan 20, 2011

sealacamp said:
Now you are putting words in my mouth. Show me one place where I have ever even remotely stated anything like that, ever!

What I have said is this:

And

I have said this and this only, many many times, God exists outside of time so who knows how long creation took. People can claim to know how long God spent creating the universe but no one really knows, only God does. The point that you keep drifting away from is that God created all that there is while current evolutionists seek to find a way to explain creation without God. You want to get side tracked with irrelevant issues. If God wanted to spend one minute making all that there is or a trillion years what is that to us? He can do anything He chooses and He created all that there is, period.

Sealacamp

I agree with you brother.

We use the term "omnipotent" (all-powerful) to describe God.

So what if could have taken 6000, or 6,000,000 years?

If God is indeed "omnipotent", isn't it not within His power to just speak a word and it in a microsecond it come into existence?

I don't care if it took 6 microseconds, or 6 seconds, or 6 minutes, or 6 hours, or 6 days, or 6 months, or 6 years, or 6 hundred years, or 6 thousand years, or even 6 million years.

To me, the important part of the Genesis creation account is who did it to begin with!

God Bless

Till all are one.

If Not For Grace · Jan 20, 2011

PrincetonGuy said:
Do Baptists appear to be intellectually challenged baboons suffering from the late stages of dementia when they argue against the theory of evolution?

The wording of the question posed is not to be understood as insulting of anyone or anyones beliefs, but as light-hearted Baptist humor.

Comparing Baptists to Baboons-not meant as an insult, If not why the disclaimer?

supersoldier71 · Jan 20, 2011

Sometimes it seems that the only tangible evidence of anything mentioned in the Bible is the fallen nature of man. Of course, some professing Christians don't even really believe that.

There is no tangible evidence of:
The God eating lunch with Abraham
The Exodus
Ezekiel's revelations
Samson's exlpoits
The Passover
The Virgin Birth
Jesus rising on the third day

So why believe in any of that, but not that God ALL-MIGHTY could (and did) speak the world into existence in the timeframe outlined in the Bible?

sealacamp · Jan 20, 2011

Is it not exceedingly malicious and hateful, and therefore exceedingly sinful, to accuse Christians of “looking for a way to usurp God and His word” simply because they believe in an academically defensible interpretation of the Bible?

Is it not exceedingly sinful to accuse Christians of not believing in evolution because you want to reinterpret what the bible clearly says? Get a mirror brother.

I don't care if it took 6 microseconds, or 6 seconds, or 6 minutes, or 6 hours, or 6 days, or 6 months, or 6 years, or 6 hundred years, or 6 thousand years, or even 6 million years.

To me, the important part of the Genesis creation account is who did it to begin with!

AMEN!!!

Sealacamp

PrincetonGuy · Jan 20, 2011

Hupomone10 said:
This is, IMHO, the ultimate in faulty logic and thinking, and it comes from having our thought patterns formed by the wisdom of man instead of by God's Word.

There is an answer for this: it is by renewing the mind constantly and consistently with a steady diet of power passages from His word. Soon your thoughts begin to be conformed to His thoughts; and you look back on the former way you thought and it amazes you that you ever thought that way. It is not a matter of becoming blind, but of seeing more clearly than ever. This is the process of renewing of the mind. This is the process of growth.

Blessings,
H.

How many creations have such a passionate love of God and His word in the Bible that they devote their lives to reading and studying the Bible in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, English, German and French as have many of my friends who believe as a consequence that the preponderance of evidence points to Genesis being a series of ancient oriental epic tales that were woven together by divine inspiration over a period of time into the eleven chapters that we have today? Does having a passionate love of God and His word in the Bible make one blind to the truth, or does it contribute greatly to the illumination of the truth?

Hupomone10 · Jan 20, 2011

Hammster said:
I do. Genesis 1. Six days. See also the Ten Commandments.

"And there was evening, and there was morning, a million years."

Gen 1:5
Gen 1:8
Gen 1:13
Gen 1:19
Gen 1:23
Gen 1:31

ok, maybe I was wrong about the "million" part.

GrampaJeff · Jan 20, 2011

My head is spinning after reading all this........guess I'll just go by FAITH.....it's elementary and I don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out.

Hupomone10 · Jan 20, 2011

GrampaJeff said:
My head is spinning after reading all this........guess I'll just go by FAITH.....it's elementary and I don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out.

You won the prize!

God always blesses faith in His Word.

Blessings,
H.

sealacamp · Jan 20, 2011

GrampaJeff said:
My head is spinning after reading all this........guess I'll just go by FAITH.....it's elementary and I don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure it out.

Well in a nutshell that is what I have been trying to say all along. I'm with you Jeff.

Sealacamp

joshua41 · Jan 21, 2011

sealacamp said:
Now you are putting words in my mouth. Show me one place where I have ever even remotely stated anything like that, ever!

A lack of evidence for a global flood.
In the past, scientists largely dismissed Noah's flood as a myth, or a local flood, as it was believed that there could not have been enough rainwater to cover the world as high as Mount Everest. Recent discoveries in plate tectonics and crustal physics have shown that a much flatter Earth could have easily been flooded, with the resultant volcanic and geologic activity altering the land surface. These details have demolished the main argument against a global flood, but the tag of "local flood" has remained because atheists do not want any evidence that supports the existence of an Almighty, Creator/God.
Evidence for a Global Flood

A mapping of the Neanderthal Genome.
Further mtDNA sequences confirmed sequence differences between Neanderthals and modern humans. Researchers compared Neanderthal mtDNA to that of modern humans from different geographic regions. If Neanderthals had interbred with modern humans in Europe, then researchers would have expected to find more similarities between Neanderthals and Europeans than between Neanderthals and other modern humans. However, Neanderthals were equidistant from modern human groups, which is consistent with genetic separation between modern humans and Neanderthals.
Ancient DNA and Neanderthals | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program
Again your evidence lacks merit. Evolution is a theory and one that does not trump or convolute the word of God to suite said theory. I'm not sure what any of your other supposed evidence even means when it is related to this discussion. It would appear that you merely present your preconceived opinions most likely based on the indoctrination of the educators of the leftist universities that abound today, all of which would just as soon see God displaced or removed altogether. Gods word has been through the fire of the ages and still it stands. When those of you that would change it to suite your ideas are done it will still stand. In the end Christ will come and make it all too clear that you are in error and that science will support God and His word. That will be all to clear if you even do any research on this subject as it is not nearly as clear cut as you put forth. I found, again, as I have many other times, so much disagreement among scientific professionals that you can put up what ever evidence you choose and there will be some other "professional" that will disagree with the results of that finding, yea any finding.
Gods word stands despite the arrows shot against it. We who stand with God stand with His word no matter what may be said against it.
Sealacamp

If you didn't care about scientific proof, even remotely, why did you post this as evidence and claim that this over rid my questions?

The point that you keep drifting away from is that God created all that there is while current evolutionists seek to find a way to explain creation without God. You want to get side tracked with irrelevant issues.
Sealacamp

Not true. If God didn't create me or this world then how can I expect him to love me enough to send his only son to die for me.

You're right, I do believe that this is topic is irrelevant to the cause of God and Jesus.

I know this has been heated, and I apologize, but I think we can all agree, (creationist or not), that God loves us more than we can imagine and is in control of our lives. I gladly and humbly accept this fact.

No one is thread that has been against creationism has been trying to limit the power of God. We just see this topic in a different light.

It is by faith I accept the Bible as the truth of God. Strong evidence has shown me and others to take a different interpretation than you.

Is God limitless? Absolutely! Could God have made the world in seven days? Ofcourse. However, empirical evidence and observation of the way the earth appears does not show this. Anyone who suggests otherwise is lying through their teeth.

supersoldier71 · Jan 21, 2011

I adamantly disagree with anyone who says that evolution and the message of the Cross are opposed. That God created Man in His own image, that Man rebelled, that God, because of His perfect love and for no other reason, chose to redeem His creation with His own blood. They are as intrinsically linked as anything in the entire universe. After the Fall, the Holy Bible is the fundamental means whereby fallen and subsequently redeemed, and reborn and rejuvenated by the blood sacrifice of Christ, can commune with the God the Father and know His will. To take any of it as less than exact and true based on the words, thoughts and observations of other fallen men is the gravest of errors.

Good day and God bless you all.

miamited · Jan 21, 2011

Hi SS,

Your post is a bit confusing to me. You claim to 'adamantly disagree' with anyone who says 'evolution and the message of the Cross are opposed'. Then you conclude with 'to take any of it as less than exact and true based on the words, thoughts and observations of other fallen men is the gravest of errors'.

Perhaps you could clarify your position.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

supersoldier71 · Jan 21, 2011

miamited said:
Hi SS,

Your post is a bit confusing to me. You claim to 'adamantly disagree' with anyone who says 'evolution and the message of the Cross are opposed'. Then you conclude with 'to take any of it as less than exact and true based on the words, thoughts and observations of other fallen men is the gravest of errors'.

Perhaps you could clarify your position.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Whoa...brain hasn't arrived in this timezone yet. To sum up: the Bible is inerrant, evolution is a lie from the depths of hell.

miamited · Jan 21, 2011

Hi SS,

That's certainly what I was hoping. God bless and get plenty of rest.
In Christ, Ted

Do Baptists appear to be intellectually challenged baboons...?

Veteran

Senior Member

Veteran

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Carpe Chaos

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον

Legend-but then so's Keith Richards

Sinner, saved by Grace

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Veteran

Forgiven

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Sinner, saved by Grace

Ted

Sinner, saved by Grace

Ted

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency