Earth

[Jet Black]

The Bible says that God created man from the clay or the elements of the earth. He created the animals from the very same elements. But one did not evolve into the other. Or at least there is no evidence to that effect. I am sure if you got a bunch of skeltons of dogs, you could arrange them in a way that it would look like over time, small dogs evolved into big dogs. So if you were to gather a group of horse skeltons and arrange them from small to big. That does not prove that horse evolved in the same way either.

so how do you explain all these transitional fossils then?

 

[JohnR7]

Creationism does not predict anything.

Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Creation shows that there is good and evil in the world. Creation also perdicts that good will ultimately win out over evil.

Creation shows that the world we live in is fallen in some way. But also creaton perdicts that all of creation will be restored so that it will become like pardise.

 

[Jet Black]

take it in context john.

 

[JohnR7]

so how do you explain all these transitional fossils then?

Do you mean fossils of things that are now extinct? From the perspective of the GAP or the YEC?

 

[Jet Black]

Do you mean fossils of things that are now extinct? From the perspective of the GAP or the YEC?

I mean all the transitional fossils, the ones mentioned in an earlier thread.

 

[Jet Black]

here it is.

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=43227

 

[ReUsAbLePhEoNiX]

Your sources have alot more to lose if there wrong, creationist either way love God. Plus, i would rather truth a believer of God than someone that rules out intelligent design completely any day of the week.

I say creationists have more too lose if their wrong.

Science thrives on evidence that falsifies its own observations. If the scientific method could falsify evolutionary theory with evidence that explains better, Scientists around the world would be having parties to celebrate.

The fact that creationism does not welcome evidence that falsifies, shows that creationism is NOT SCIENCE

 

[JohnR7]

I mean all the transitional fossils, the ones mentioned in an earlier thread.

Yeah, it is like bowling, just set up the pins and the truth of the word of God will keep on knocking them down. Even if you have millions of articals, if they do not line up with the word of God, then they are in error and do not represent the truth.

Here is a example from the link you gave me: "Scientists have long known that cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) descended from four-footed land mammals"

Now we know from the Bible that this is not true. God first created the plants, then He created every living creature in the ocean & then:

Genesis 1:24
And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

Clearly the sea creatures came before the land creatures, so what ""Scientists have long known" is clearly in error.

 

[Arikay]

Care to actually provide scientific evidence to back that up john?

Remember, people for a long time clearly Knew the sun revolved around the earth because the bible said so.

 

[ifriit]

Yeah, it is like bowling, just set up the pins and the truth of the word of God will keep on knocking them down. Even if you have millions of articals, if they do not line up with the word of God, then they are in error and do not represent the truth.

So, do you then believe the scientific method is useless as a means of establishing the veracity--or at least likely veracity--of a proposition about the universe?

 

[Jet Black]

Yeah, it is like bowling, just set up the pins and the truth of the word of God will keep on knocking them down. Even if you have millions of articals, if they do not line up with the word of God, then they are in error and do not represent the truth.

in short, regardless of the quantity of evidence placed in front of you, you will ignore it.

 

[JohnR7]

So, do you then believe the scientific method is useless as a means of establishing the veracity--or at least likely veracity--of a proposition about the universe?

Something is worthwhile or worthless to the degree that it lines up with the living word of the living God. For people to do what seems "right in their own eyes" does not work.

The question is: What profit a man if he were to gain the whole world but lose his soul? If all your interested in is this life, then what is useful and what is useless is going to be different than if your interested in eternity and what is going to last forever.

So, in the long run, anything that does not line up with truth as we find it in the written word of God is more than worthless, it will lead to destruction. Only in the truth is there life.

 

[JohnR7]

in short, regardless of the quantity of evidence placed in front of you, you will ignore it.

It depends if the evidence lines up with the word of God. IF it contradicts the Bible, then it is not relyable "evidence".

 

[JohnR7]

in short, regardless of the quantity of evidence placed in front of you, you will ignore it.

It depends on if the "evidence" lines up with the word of God. If it contradicts the Bible, then it is not relyable.

 

[Jet Black]

Something is worthwhile or worthless to the degree that it lines up with the living word of the living God. For people to do what seems "right in their own eyes" does not work.

The question is: What profit a man if he were to gain the whole world but lose his soul? If all your interested in is this life, then what is useful and what is useless is going to be different than if your interested in eternity and what is going to last forever.

So, in the long run, anything that does not line up with truth as we find it in the written word of God is more than worthless, it will lead to destruction. Only in the truth is there life.

how about just answering the question.

 

[Jet Black]

It depends on if the "evidence" lines up with the word of God. If it contradicts the Bible, then it is not relyable.

so you will ignore it if it doesn't agree with the bible?

 

[JohnR7]

so you will ignore it if it doesn't agree with the bible?

To be Holy, Sanctifed, Consecrated, and set apart onto God, means to do what you can to avoid what is not of God.

 

[Jet Black]

To be Holy, Sanctifed, Consecrated, and set apart onto God, means to do what you can to avoid what is not of God.

a simple yes or no answer will suffice:

if you are faced with evidence that entirely contradicts the bible, will you ignore it, yes or no?

 

[Arikay]

But what if the evidence is of god because its part of his earth?

So now you are ignoring god?

 

[ifriit]

So, in the long run, anything that does not line up with truth as we find it in the written word of God is more than worthless, it will lead to destruction. Only in the truth is there life.

John, this does not appear to answer my question unless that answer is yes, so I will ask again, and be plain about your answer, please. Do you then believe the scientific method is useless as a means of establishing the veracity--or at least likely veracity--of a proposition about the universe?