Genesis Creation OR THIS?

[Givemeareason]

Yea, I guess you are right. In fact biblical fundamentalism probably drives more people away from religion than anything.

That doesn't sound very Christian to me.

 

[Givemeareason]

I am not an expert in the field so videos by people who do speak out and are expert in their field are watched. Of course they are ridiculed but they present good evidence and point out obvious areas with assumptions and even misinformation applied by others.

Are they advancing any new ideas or just trying to poke holes in old ideas? If it is the latter why do you think they are doing that?

 

[Cearbhall]

But, no, humanity needed to know more. And so a story was created in terms that even a goat herder could understand.

You've described one of the problems right here. "God made this and that" is much easier to understand than the actual science of the universe.

 

[AllanV]

Are they advancing any new ideas or just trying to poke holes in old ideas? If it is the latter why do you think they are doing that?

They come across reasonably. They are experts as much as any one can be. I do have some bias but used to go along with the evolutionary explanation because with out resources and direct interest did not make it an important issue.
There have been some programs on the local TV news, documentaries, Aljazeera and now the Seventh Day Adventist church have their own Channel that occasionally shows creation ministries presentations.
To me the churches doctrine is close but doesn't go as deep as it should in changing the heart (inner being). Almost all of the preachers are difficult to listen to, but the scientists talking about creation are presenting an honest appraisal considering what they see as difficulties and assumptions taken from an evolutionary viewpoint. It seems that physics is showing one thing and the conclusions of so called evolutionary evidence another, something isn't adding up.

The worry is to some extent that without a God as creator man has no boundaries on what he wants to do. Man wants to exert his own power and he worships the work of his own hands.

The GM question is interesting because on one hand we are told that everything has taken a long time to develop the way it has but now science will change things in a short time. Food intolerance is on the increase and my thought is that it is a percentage game and some people will not adjust but most will hopefully.

Most science is set to exploit natural resources for gain and true motives need to be looked at.
There is a lot of money being put into immortality or at the least life extension by the wealthy. This is the message of the Bible that it was lost but immortality will be recovered and as it says the meek shall inherit the earth and it is difficult almost impossible for the wealthy.

There are some links that could be put up and it is interesting to take note of the objections of those on the evolutionary side of the argument. It is difficult for those presenting the other side because they do lose credibility and even their jobs.

 

[AllanV]

You've described one of the problems right here. "God made this and that" is much easier to understand than the actual science of the universe.

The Eternal God makes everything appear at every instant. There is a way of knowing God and He requests that we do. God is a God close at hand.

Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

 

[Givemeareason]

They come across reasonably. They are experts as much as any one can be. I do have some bias but used to go along with the evolutionary explanation because with out resources and direct interest did not make it an important issue.
There have been some programs on the local TV news, documentaries, Aljazeera and now the Seventh Day Adventist church have their own Channel that occasionally shows creation ministries presentations.
To me the churches doctrine is close but doesn't go as deep as it should in changing the heart (inner being). Almost all of the preachers are difficult to listen to, but the scientists talking about creation are presenting an honest appraisal considering what they see as difficulties and assumptions taken from an evolutionary viewpoint. It seems that physics is showing one thing and the conclusions of so called evolutionary evidence another, something isn't adding up.

The worry is to some extent that without a God as creator man has no boundaries on what he wants to do. Man wants to exert his own power and he worships the work of his own hands.

The GM question is interesting because on one hand we are told that everything has taken a long time to develop the way it has but now science will change things in a short time. Food intolerance is on the increase and my thought is that it is a percentage game and some people will not adjust but most will hopefully.

Most science is set to exploit natural resources for gain and true motives need to be looked at.
There is a lot of money being put into immortality or at the least life extension by the wealthy. This is the message of the Bible that it was lost but immortality will be recovered and as it says the meek shall inherit the earth and it is difficult almost impossible for the wealthy.

There are some links that could be put up and it is interesting to take note of the objections of those on the evolutionary side of the argument. It is difficult for those presenting the other side because they do lose credibility and even their jobs.

So you agree they are not advancing any new ideas. So they just want to poke holes in other ideas which can be scientifically valid approach if it were useful. But they have no better scientific explanations to replace the ones they are trying to destroy. Science is limited to natural observations and explanations.

While some people do try to use science to try to destroy God others like these purported scientists you are referring to are generally just trying to use science to destroy science. They seem to think if they can somehow prove science wrong they can advance God. But the problem with that sort of reasoning is the realization that tearing down one idea does not mean another idea is correct. A better understanding might be that science is trying to understand God. The people you refer to have no worthwhile ideas anyway. At least not yet which is why they are ridiculed. They go about ignoring existing and plentiful evidence while looking for new places they can punch holes. God cannot be proven or disproven and is beyond science at this point in time.

 

[bhsmte]

Yea, I guess you are right. In fact biblical fundamentalism probably drives more people away from religion than anything.

That's a fact.

When people are polled and asked why they left Christianity, one of the biggest reasons is fundamentalist beliefs.

 

[PeterDona]

Why do humans and chimpanzees share a broken vitamin C gene at the exact same place in their genomes? Did God intentionally design both humans and chimps with a broken gene in the same place? Why not just create both species without that particular gene? A broken vitamin C gene makes it impossible for the body to produce vitamin C, so the inclusion of this gene at all is rather redundant if its broken. Did God create both species with this broken gene so as to make evolution appear true? God doesn't deceive us...

This piece of evidence alone shatters young earth creationist arguments. There is simply no reasonable way to explain this from a young-earth paradigm.

ALoveDivine, can you provide me with a link to this piece of information. That would be most interesting for me to look into. As a molecular biologist, I would be interested in a link that includes a view to the DNA sequences and explanation what would be the DNA sequence of a functional vitamin C.

If you are right, that would be one point for evolution over creation. But I want to see the evidence.

 

[ALoveDivine]

Look into the "Gulo Pseudogene"

About the Gene:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-gulonolactone_oxidase

In the Context of Evolution
http://www.evolutionarymodel.com/pseudogenes.htm

You can find any needed refrences at those two links, and elsewhere I imagine.

As I've said the evidence from genetics is really overwhelming in establishing the veracity of the Theory of Evolution. The majority of Christians embrace this, the rest need to come to the same conclusion. The author of scripture and of nature are one and the same.

 

[PeterDona]

Look into the "Gulo Pseudogene"

About the Gene:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-gulonolactone_oxidase

That is an interesting thing, that I never meditated in the context of creationism, the existence of pseudogenes. Very very interesting. I have immediately speculated, what may have been the history of this loss of gene function in some animals. Here are some options, that could be within the framework of Young Earth Creationism:
1) a virus, altering a specific DNA sequence, may have been at work. There are diseases that work on more than one kind of animal, so this could have been possible (though I do wonder ...)
2) There is a genetic squeeze described in the Bible, namely the Ark. Only those kinds on the ark would carry offspring. If any animal or human on the ark had a mutation, then it would be carried on to subsequent generations.

I was suspicious when the wikipedia named the age of divergence as 65 million years. I believe this is the evolutionary age where the flood happened, since this is where dinosaurs allegedly became extinct. So, evolutionary time 65 mio years = 4500 real years.

I am a Young Earth Creationist by faith, and I would like that one to appear in my subscript, but I have not found out how to do that yet.

 

[Colter]

That's a fact.

When people are polled and asked why they left Christianity, one of the biggest reasons is fundamentalist beliefs.

Evolution in all aspects must run it's coarse, human wisdom must evolve. Revelations occur, but a gallon can't fit into a quart. Often revelations are contaminated by previous beliefs and practices, by evolved religion, by the limitations of understanding of the audience. Revelation must then be current if it is to be received, not too far removed from the concepts in the age in which they occur. Jesus stretched minds as far as he could away from fasts and forms without being a complete freak with ideas that no one could relate to. So between Jesus and todays religion about Jesus, Christianity, a great deal has changed.

 

[Colter]

That is an interesting thing, that I never meditated in the context of creationism, the existence of pseudogenes. Very very interesting. I have immediately speculated, what may have been the history of this loss of gene function in some animals. Here are some options, that could be within the framework of Young Earth Creationism:
1) a virus, altering a specific DNA sequence, may have been at work. There are diseases that work on more than one kind of animal, so this could have been possible (though I do wonder ...)
2) There is a genetic squeeze described in the Bible, namely the Ark. Only those kinds on the ark would carry offspring. If any animal or human on the ark had a mutation, then it would be carried on to subsequent generations.

I was suspicious when the wikipedia named the age of divergence as 65 million years. I believe this is the evolutionary age where the flood happened, since this is where dinosaurs allegedly became extinct. So, evolutionary time 65 mio years = 4500 real years.

I am a Young Earth Creationist by faith, and I would like that one to appear in my subscript, but I have not found out how to do that yet.

For access to your subscript go up to the top of the page where it says "user panel" Scroll down to Settings....Personal details...."signature", that's where you can put your quotes or faith statement kind of stuff.

 

[Alithis]

Why do humans and chimpanzees share a broken vitamin C gene at the exact same place in their genomes? Did God intentionally design both humans and chimps with a broken gene in the same place? Why not just create both species without that particular gene? A broken vitamin C gene makes it impossible for the body to produce vitamin C, so the inclusion of this gene at all is rather redundant if its broken. Did God create both species with this broken gene so as to make evolution appear true? God doesn't deceive us...

This piece of evidence alone shatters young earth creationist arguments. There is simply no reasonable way to explain this from a young-earth paradigm.

doesn't shatter anything at all . but it does show that where you thought you believed in God , your struggling whether to believe man instead . faith in god is not based on science its based on God and what he says .Just because ones science cannot agree does not make God wrong

 

[Alithis]

but a gallon can't fit into a quart.

in science it cannot not ..in faith 5 fish feed 5000 , there is no scientific equation for that .

 

[Colter]

in science it cannot not ..in faith 5 fish feed 5000 , there is no scientific equation for that .

It was "science" that our unseen friends used to reproduce the fish and the loaves to feed the people in accordance with the will of the Son. To the celestial world, the fish and loaves wasn't a miracle because they know how it was done. To God nothing is a miracle, he knows how it's done.

 

[Alithis]

It was "science" that our unseen friends used to reproduce the fish and the loaves to feed the people in accordance with the will of the Son. To the celestial world, the fish and loaves wasn't a miracle because they know how it was done. To God nothing is a miracle, he knows how it's done.

your unseen friends are no friends of mine .

 

[Givemeareason]

doesn't shatter anything at all . but it does show that where you thought you believed in God , your struggling whether to believe man instead . faith in god is not based on science its based on God and what he says .Just because ones science cannot agree does not make God wrong

Duh??

 

[Givemeareason]

That is an interesting thing, that I never meditated in the context of creationism, the existence of pseudogenes. Very very interesting. I have immediately speculated, what may have been the history of this loss of gene function in some animals. Here are some options, that could be within the framework of Young Earth Creationism:
1) a virus, altering a specific DNA sequence, may have been at work. There are diseases that work on more than one kind of animal, so this could have been possible (though I do wonder ...)
2) There is a genetic squeeze described in the Bible, namely the Ark. Only those kinds on the ark would carry offspring. If any animal or human on the ark had a mutation, then it would be carried on to subsequent generations.

I was suspicious when the wikipedia named the age of divergence as 65 million years. I believe this is the evolutionary age where the flood happened, since this is where dinosaurs allegedly became extinct. So, evolutionary time 65 mio years = 4500 real years.

I am a Young Earth Creationist by faith, and I would like that one to appear in my subscript, but I have not found out how to do that yet.

It appears you are claiming to be a scientist. In that regard, can you offer a statement of the guiding philosophy that you use in pursuing evidence. What is it you are looking for?

 

[Alithis]

Duh??

reply was to you nor for you

 

[Givemeareason]

reply was to you nor for you

So you were talking to yourself. Okay.