Here's my problem, I believe in evolution, and it brings up doubts especially in the OT...

RickG · Nov 30, 2015

Rod Carty said:
It's not the evidence itself but the interpretation of the evidence. Interpretation done by people who deny God exists is immediately suspect. For example, the geologic evidence, literally "mountains of evidence", is used by evolutionists/long agers and creationists/YECs. It's the same evidence. Thus any claim implying evolutionists have mountains of evidence but creationists do not is at best misinterpreting the nature of evidence itself.

I disagree with that Rod. The creation science people do not interpret the same evidence differently, they misrepresent it, and if wish to provide a citation in the geological sciences where you think they do, please do so, I would be more than happy to discuss it with you. In fact I have a thread I started where the same evidence, different interpretation is the subject.
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/creation-science-same-data-different-interpretation.7912376/

Loudmouth · Nov 30, 2015

Rod Carty said:
It's not the evidence itself but the interpretation of the evidence. Interpretation done by people who deny God exists is immediately suspect.

All you are doing is proving just how biased creationists are. If you didn't believe in a global flood to begin with, there would be no reason to conclude that there was one. Your own words prove it.

For example, the geologic evidence, literally "mountains of evidence", is used by evolutionists/long agers and creationists/YECs. It's the same evidence.

It isn't the same evidence. Creationists/YECers don't use the evidence. They either ignore it or misrepresent it.

TLK Valentine · Nov 30, 2015

Justatruthseeker said:
Not at all. But it is not just a static history book. Either it is valid for all times and ages or it isn't. If it isn't throw it in the trash because it is useless for today. If it is, then accept it for the things it try's to tell you.

Well, that's gotta be the single most absurd use of a false dilemma fallacy I've ever heard.

You walk into a supermarket... either you can use every single item they're selling, or you might as well never go there again because it is useless for today.

bhsmte · Nov 30, 2015

Rod Carty said:
It's not the evidence itself but the interpretation of the evidence. Interpretation done by people who deny God exists is immediately suspect. For example, the geologic evidence, literally "mountains of evidence", is used by evolutionists/long agers and creationists/YECs. It's the same evidence. Thus any claim implying evolutionists have mountains of evidence but creationists do not is at best misinterpreting the nature of evidence itself.

I think your interpretation of these people is faulty.

There are plenty of scientists who believe in God, who agree with the theory of evolution. In fact, many more Christians agree with evolution, compared to atheists.

Ever hear of the devout Christian Francis Collins, who happens to be a physician and geneticist, talk about how strong the evidence is, to support evolution?

smaneck · Nov 30, 2015

Rod Carty said:
It's not the evidence itself but the interpretation of the evidence. Interpretation done by people who deny God exists is immediately suspect. For example, the geologic evidence, literally "mountains of evidence", is used by evolutionists/long agers and creationists/YECs. It's the same evidence. Thus any claim implying evolutionists have mountains of evidence but creationists do not is at best misinterpreting the nature of evidence itself.

Evolutionists do not begin with any presuppositions regarding the existence of God, period. At least not as scientists. The problem with creationists is that they begin with their thesis (the Genesis story) then look for evidence to back it up. But the Scientific Method looks at the evidence and tries to figure out what theory can best fit the data.

lesliedellow · Nov 30, 2015

Rod Carty said:
Interpret Scripture with Scripture. If an interpretation of one Scripture passage is contradicted by other Scripture passages then we know that interpretation is wrong. The claim that the creation account is myth is contradicted by, for example, the passage that says all Scripture is God-breathed, or God-inspired. It would make the creation account purely man's ideas.

Only if you assume that God is only capable of speaking in the same crassly literal terms that you want to read the Bible. Anything the infinite God says to his finite creatures is going to be dumbed down big time.

Ada Lovelace · Nov 30, 2015

I saw this in another thread (credit to @TLK Valentine) and thought it was appropriate for this one:

Smidlee · Nov 30, 2015

smaneck said:
Evolutionists do not begin with any presuppositions regarding the existence of God, period. At least not as scientists. The problem with creationists is that they begin with their thesis (the Genesis story) then look for evidence to back it up. But the Scientific Method looks at the evidence and tries to figure out what theory can best fit the data.

Most evolutionist are blinded by the fact they too beginning with a religious principle and make all the data fit that principle... the principle of continuity. This is why evolutionist are so dogmatic that all the evidence fit their theory ... If the principle of continuity is "Truth" then evolution must be true.

TLK Valentine · Nov 30, 2015

Smidlee said:
Most evolutionist are blinded by the fact they too beginning with a religious principle and make all the data fit that principle... the principle of continuity. This is why evolutionist are so dogmatic that all the evidence fit their theory ... If the principle of continuity is "Truth" then evolution must be true.

And how would you define the "principle of continuity"?

Smidlee · Nov 30, 2015

TLK Valentine said:
And how would you define the "principle of continuity"?

It based on the old religious idea that everything is interconnected ... The new age movement goes a step farther and claims everything is interconnected because everything is God. Instead of everything the result of four forces they claim a single force ... May the Force be with you Luke Skywalker. It's this religious principle that cause man believe he is the creation of the stars.

TLK Valentine · Nov 30, 2015

Smidlee said:
It based on the old religious idea that everything is interconnected ... The new age movement goes a step farther and claims everything is interconnected because everything is God. Instead of everything the result of four forces they claim a single force ... May the Force be with you Luke Skywalker. It's this religious principle that cause man believe he is the creation of the stars.

Nice word salad... Now what's the definition?

Smidlee · Nov 30, 2015

TLK Valentine said:
Nice word salad... Now what's the definition?

Well you ask me how I would define it and I did.

bhsmte · Nov 30, 2015

Stanfordella said:
I saw this in another thread (credit to @TLK Valentine) and thought it was appropriate for this one:

Hilarious!!!

smaneck · Nov 30, 2015

Rod Carty said:
The claim that the creation account is myth is contradicted by, for example, the passage that says all Scripture is God-breathed, or God-inspired. It would make the creation account purely man's ideas.

I believe that passage from 2 Timothy was written in response to Gnostic Christians who wanted to throw out the Tanakh entirely, hold that only an evil demiurge could have created this physical world of suffering. And that the text goes on to say: "and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness."
It seems to me this is where religion has authority, not things like science or history.

smaneck · Nov 30, 2015

bhsmte said:
Hilarious!!!

There are ahadith in Islam which pretty much say that very thing (minus the last part.)

"The Prophet Muhammad said, "We, the concourse of Prophets, were
commanded to address the people according to the capacity of their
minds."

"Speak to the people of that with which they are familiar. Do you wish God and His Messenger to be accused of
lying?"

Genesis is the "no" to the Babylonian Creation myths not the Evolution. In order to understand what it is saying we really need to understand the Babylonian myths it is saying no to.

smaneck · Nov 30, 2015

Loudmouth said:
It isn't the same evidence. Creationists/YECers don't use the evidence. They either ignore it or misrepresent it.

They use it when they can. As I said, they begin with their premise and then look for whatever evidence they can use to back it up. But a scientists looks at the evidence and decides what explanation can account for it. That is what makes the Scientific Method itself incompatible with Creationism.

smaneck · Nov 30, 2015

Smidlee said:
Most evolutionist are blinded by the fact they too beginning with a religious principle and make all the data fit that principle... the principle of continuity.

If scientists were that hung up on the principle of continuity, there would be no Big Bang Theory.

James Wilson · Nov 30, 2015

Neogaia777 said:
Here's my problem, I believe in evolution, and it brings up doubts especially in the OT... were the OT writers simply writing what they "thought" and the way they "felt" about God, and not in an actual words God actually said..

Well, my problem is I believe the scientific evidence which casts doubt on some of the Bible writers, BUT, I have too much personal experiencial evidence of a God and other spirits existing on another side beside this one...

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...periencing-part-of-a-pm-conversation.7843548/

My personal experiencial evidence stands on it's very own as enough proof for me, but have I encountered the same God (YHWH) spoke about in the OT, some OT acts and verses by God cast a shadow of a doubt on him being a or the God of Love...

Anyone help?
When we discuss theology within the context of science, we have problems because science is biased. Dr. Halton Arp calculated the size of the universe using red-shifted light from some stars. He had one equation with two unknowns (which can never be solved). So he assumed that all these stars were fleeing from Earth at the speed of light. Scientists acclaimed his resulting calculation of the size of the universe! Until he retracted his solution because he had assumed the answer. Then he was fired! I thought we were supposed to protect whistleblowers!
As soon as I heard about his firing, I contacted him on the net to verify. He said, "I wasn't actually fired, but I'm an astronomer and I need telescope time to do my work. They took away my telescope time."
He has a website where he shows paired stars where one star has red-shifted light and the other does not. This implies that "red-shifted light" means something other than traveling at near speed of light and that the universe age has been miscalculated. But you'll never hear an evolutionist admit to that.

God Bless!

James Wilson · Nov 30, 2015

One of the problems when we try to match up the Bible with science is the bias of scientists.

Dr. Halton Arp calculated the size of the universe using red-shifted light from some stars. He had one equation with two unknowns (which can never be solved). So he assumed that all these stars were fleeing from Earth at the speed of light. Scientists acclaimed his resulting calculation of the size of the universe! Until he retracted his solution because he had assumed the answer. Then he was fired! I thought we were supposed to protect whistleblowers!

Dr. Arp has a website where he discusses paired stars (stars that circle each other) where one has red-shifted light and the other does not. This implies that red-shifted light means something other than traveling at near-speed of light and hence, the age of the universe has been way overestimated. But you'll never hear that admitted by our biased scientists.

JacksBratt · Nov 30, 2015

essentialsaltes said:
It's hard to reconcile killing every living thing on earth but for one family and a few lucky animals with compassion, graciousness, or mercy, no matter how long someone preached beforehand.

Well, if you did a bit of research, you would see that "all flesh had corrupted His way upon the earth". What this means is that, not only was Noah the only righteous man, along with his wife and three sons, they were the only pure human bloodline remaining.

Satan had corrupted the human gene pool in a plan to remove any possibility of any human being purely human and thus not be able to be God's creation in pure blood and DNA, and without a pure bloodline there could be no Jesus as savior.

Noah and his family were the last. Noah was "perfect in his generations". In other words his line was still pure human genes.

This is why God killed every beast and every air breathing being except the pure animals, as He created them, that came on their own to the ark and the only 5 pure humans. Notice, Noah did not have to gather the animals, they just came. Many believe that the animals of Greek mythology are actual animals that were created by genetic manipulation by technologies given to the humans by the fallen angels. This is a lost technology.

In order to save the people and animals He created, as He created them, He had to bring the flood. He saved His creations, out of love, on the first life raft.... the ark.

Later, after the flood, there was more corruption of the human gene pool. Noah's son's had wives that Noah chose for them. These wives were not of pure human DNA. They could have pure human offspring or not pure depending on the chromosomes at conception. Thus we get the Canaanites, the giants of the promised land, Goliath, the giants of Egyptian hieroglyphs, Nimrod etc.

Several times God asks for the complete destruction of a genetic group. This is due to the fact that they were of this impure gene pool. However, the chosen people don't always do as they are asked by God.

Many believe that there are people trying to clone DNA from Nimrod and other "Nephilime" today.

Here's my problem, I believe in evolution, and it brings up doubts especially in the OT...

Senior Veteran

Contributor

I've already read the books you want burned.

Newbie

Baha'i

Member

Grateful to scientists and all health care workers

Veteran

I've already read the books you want burned.

Veteran

I've already read the books you want burned.

Veteran

Newbie

Baha'i

Baha'i

Baha'i

Baha'i

Newbie

Newbie

Searching for Truth

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency