How long has man been created.

mpok1519 said:

what do I fear? Didnt know you were my psychologist =)

Click to expand...

Psychologist would do no good. It would have to be a psychiatrist, at minimum. =)

No, I'm just not big fan of mixing scripture, translating it so crypticlly, THEN sticky-pasting it to a science book to fit someone's faith; faith will always be challenged, as will science, but, science seems to be winning most of its challenges.

Click to expand...

You're not winning. Its a game of dominating the conversation by means of obfuscation and denial of what's said, ploy. "Did you say something? Really? I did not hear a word you said. Oh that? Such silly talk! Etc..

That is how you must be in order to think you "win." Its not real winning. For you never disprove what I say. You simply take the smug approach and choose not to consider something. "Nonsense... move on." "Its a bad argument." "yawn." You never win. You try to outwit, but its only a shallow effort, at best.

Actually no, I don't expect you to have an open mind; when descent with modification and gene flow/drift are terms you cannot comprehend.

Click to expand...

That's simply a hypothesis that you accept as Gospel. What a close mind does is refuse to see that an alternative solution may not only be better, it answers all the naggling empty holes your theory leaves you with. If the Bible says that God created a previous creation? And then destroyed it? And, then replaced it with a new creation in its place? It explains why we find fossils and why your camp tries very hard to supply us with the transitional forms they do not find. That is. Transitionals that should be just as plentiful as what you show as a fully formed species caught in stone.

The Bible (when exegeted like men had been doing for many centuries before Darwin was ever born) was supplying the answer before the question could be asked. But, some sloppy Bible interpretation that developed in to a tradition that was never challenged, is your only defense. Young earth creationism is the result of sloppy Biblical interpretation. Yet, Bible scholars long ago were already seeing reason to believe by what the Hebrew reveals, that the current earth we now see is only a most recent creation to grace the face of this planet.

Yes... You are closed minded. But, I do understand. It would be asking you too much to consider anything other than what you have accepted as the new traditional thought brought about by blurring the distinction between what is a hypothesis and what is proven fact.

Remove God from creation? And? Your theory is all you have left. Keep God in the equation? It would force an honest seeking mind to keep seeking for an answer until its found. But, since you do not believe God is consistent and real? Why should continue to try and reason with you?

and the class room has no place for pseudo-science.

Click to expand...

Especially, when what has long been found in the Bible is in complete harmony with the scientific data. But? Because its not in agreement with the worshiped, sacred, hypothesis, that many scientists genuflect to? You become like religious priest who proclaims all who do not accept your scientific dogma are inreachable heathen. Funny how your attitude runs parallel to many self assured religious people I bump into in the forums.

You have no idea how your so called scientific view is really like religion. Its followed with the same kind of mind set of the very devoted religious types. Instead of you being inculcated with chapters and verse which are distorted, you cling to your data which draws to a distorted conclusion AKA, hypothesis. The only difference between the two is the object of adoration. Both have the same closed minded tenacity. One expresses it one way. You express it through the filter of the ways of the scientific mind.

Blue sapphire said:

Just interested if anyone has tell me how long since Adam was created, according to the Bible....I believe this can be worked out.

I know it is close to 6000 years....but exactly how many years, was what I was interested in.

Click to expand...

Since Adam. That's all we have to know. God gives us extremely detailed genealogies from Seth to Noah and of Noah's sons. All of us came from them. And that's exactly how the Flood stories circulated the earth; from the sons of Noah and their descendants who scattered over all the earth.

No one here is denying that evolution takes place. You guys are not debating me. You are debating prejudices with a. tunnel vision view. One of seeing all Christians who accept Creation as being only one way. As a cliche.

Click to expand...

That's pretty funny that you say that Genez, because you seem to be quite the candidate for deciding to misunderstand people. For example, (1) You fail to bridge your own man-made disconnect between chance/randomness and God's involvement in the creation. YOUR BELIEF that, if man was created through evolution, then God does not exist or is not evolved, is fallacious and comparable to what many atheists and agnostics believe today. "No one here is denying that" God was involved in the creation, yet you try to label us as the archetypical atheist who does feel that by man being created through "chance", then that must equate then that God does not exist. Again, we're not saying that, yet you're trying to say that we're saying that - pretty convenient stance on your part don't you think? (2) You asked a question concerning evolution and homosexualities place in it all. Well, of course, without even hearing us out you presumptuously jumped to the conclusion that we fit some sort of concocted stereotype that somehow by believing in human evolution, this also makes us pro-gay. Again we were not saying or inferring that, yet you're trying to say that we're saying that - pretty convenient stance on your part don't you think? In your own words, "You are debating prejudices with a. tunnel vision view"

That's simply a hypothesis that you accept as Gospel.

What a close mind does is refuse to see that an alternative solution may not only be better, it answers all the naggling empty holes your theory leaves you with. If the Bible says that God created a previous creation? And then destroyed it? And, then replaced it with a new creation in its place? It explains why we find fossils and why your camp tries very hard to supply us with the transitional forms they do not find. That is. Transitionals that should be just as plentiful as what you show as a fully formed species caught in stone.

Click to expand...

Wait, but isn't that exactly what your doing right now? You've been fed the same garbage that the Bible is the end all, be all source of truth that you have in effect "closed your mind" to believing that truth may spring forth from other founts (i.e. secular founts) truth is not exclusively bound by the same book cover as the bible. As a result, naturally, you "refuse to see tht an alternative solution may not only be better, it answers all the naggling empty holes your theory leaves you with." Sound familiar? Pretty Matthew 23-ish wouldn't you say? I'm sorry, YOUR et al gap theory is simply not supported by what we see in nature. Fossilization takes place even today. Many species we see today are also found in fossil form from millions of years ago, surrounded by some of the very same fossils of extict species "hypothesized" by you et al, were on the other side of said gap. The fossil evidence alone that we observe in nature has bridged that gap theory, effectively exposing it as counterfeit truth - that's just the way it is.

On the flip-side, most theologic evolutionists carry the lifestyle of open-mindedness. Consequently, it was not hard for us as authentic seekers of truth to recognize the truth concerning the creation of man. You remind of myself like 20 years ago when I too was fed the misconception that if I were to believe that man was created by evolutionary means, that this would somehow disprove the existence of a God. Wake up Genez, should we all not follow the admonition of Paul...

Philippians 4:8: Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

...Obviously he is implying that "these things" would be found both in and outside of the Bible. I implore you to not set limits on your full understanding of the truth, from "whatsoever" source it may come from. Every quality listed by Paul describes the miracle that is human evolution, as well as the evolution of all species on earth today - knowing that our Father is responsible for all of it.

Click to expand...

genez said:

This thread began on May 8th. You entered on May 14th. I entered only a day before you.

I would say that you have been shown my answer many times in this thread. I say that what you are asking me to do is to forget well over 30 hours of effort that I have given to this thread. If you would please take some time to see what you missed after you jumped in late, you will see I covered this issue several times. Your question tells me that you jumped in late and now wish me to start all over again. If I answer here now, it will require that I repeat all over again what I have already said in order to show why I believe it to be true. Please... take a little time and read through this thread to see all that you missed. That would only be fair.

.

Click to expand...

OK I read it.

You do not think evolution can form a “new Species”
I put mine down in 2 sentences. Can’t you?

You took more time to write this then you would have just stating it in 2 sentences.

Do you know the words “punctuated equilibrium”? You may want to use these words, I often do.

Evolution has more evidence than yours for species formation ... That is ... new species. What is so nice about science is that you may come up with one of your own. All you need is some evidence to support your stance.

My stance has evidence.

Do you have any evidence that supports your assertion? We both use the bible as one piece, so you can’t use that one. Do you have any others?

An Arch Angel said:

OK I read it.

You do not think evolution can form a “new Species”
I put mine down in 2 sentences. Can’t you?

You took more time to write this then you would have just stating it in 2 sentences.

Do you know the words “punctuated equilibrium”? You may want to use these words, I often do.

Evolution has more evidence than yours for species formation ... That is ... new species. What is so nice about science is that you may come up with one of your own. All you need is some evidence to support your stance.

My stance has evidence.

Do you have any evidence that supports your assertion? We both use the bible as one piece, so you can’t use that one. Do you have any others?

Click to expand...

Tell me, what is the definition of a true species, one that is defined by all scientists to be a species. I have looked up the word and find science to have formulated several definitions and no two are the same or agreed upon by all scientists.

richterforest said:

Tell me, what is the definition of a true species, one that is defined by all scientists to be a species. I have looked up the word and find science to have formulated several definitions and no two are the same or agreed upon by all scientists.

Click to expand...

That's the point. They can make up there own rules. Yet, some here believe what they have accepted is what we should be thinking. I have heard all sorts of variations on what evolution entails. One says it never was "survival of the fittest." Yet for years that was what was taught. At one time they claimed there will be many missing links found, but now we must call them transitionals, because many (if any) were never found. Of course... they can not find them as they should have if the theory was valid. The rules kept changing to stay alive.

As far as what I have been presenting for others to consider:

Without Form and Void - Frontpage

The Biblical interpretation PRECEDED the need to explain why we find fossils. The reason it was able to come before, is because its truly to be found in the Bible! Men living centuries before Darwin was born, were seeing in the Hebrew and Greek texts that Scripture was indicating that this current world we live in was not the first. They had no agenda to guide them to come to such a conclusion. Nor, could they figure out why that should be! It was only after Darwin's book became popular that contemporary scholars began rediscovering these works. The traditional erroneous interpretation was never questioned because it was never challenged to being false. Yet, young earth creationists who cherished tradition wish to come to its rescue, and only end up sinking us deeper in quicksand. For science will disprove young earth creationism every time.

That was:


Without Form and Void - Frontpage


That link reveals what Bible scholars have known for some time, but the anti-academia fundamentalists today scorn , because it requires a working knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek to discover, not some English translation that fails to properly convey the depth of meanings to be found in the originals.


Grace and peace, GeneZ




.

richterforest said:

Tell me, what is the definition of a true species, one that is defined by all scientists to be a species. I have looked up the word and find science to have formulated several definitions and no two are the same or agreed upon by all scientists.

Click to expand...

Excellent question,
This is a great example of how science works.

Science is only a tool that collects information about the surrounding world, that we can observe. Scientists are the ones that make assertions from graphs and observations NOT SCIENCE. You can take a stance so long as you have evidence. Other scientist may agree or disagree, and, with scientist egos involved, you can get a rather nasty exchange of assertions … lol.

A general, but not precise, cut off that I use is if they can inter breed. Like minerals, we need to use a “SET OF” defining characteristics of species. There are many crossovers in God world. There is no black and white, those colors do not exists.

This is also a great example of where some scientists throw around the word “fact” incorrectly. There are no facts, only approximations that fit more/less conditions.

Keep in mind … I am not a biologist ...

Great observation richter

An Arch Angel said:

Excellent question,
This is a great example of how science works.

Science is only a tool that collects information about the surrounding world, that we can observe. Scientists are the ones that make assertions from graphs and observations NOT SCIENCE.

Click to expand...

As long as they keep rejecting the Bible, their conclusions will be entertaining and speculative as to why we find fossils. I think they really crave and enjoy this "entertaining" aspect. They have fun with it. The Bible would take away that toy, and they would need to then concentrate on being under the authority of God. Not so entertaining to many, because of all the foolish mindless examples of Christianity they had been exposed to in the past.

You can take a stance so long as you have evidence. Other scientist may agree or disagree, and, with scientist egos involved, you can get a rather nasty exchange of assertions … lol.

Click to expand...

As we can witness to with some here.

A general, but not precise, cut off that I use is if they can inter breed. Like minerals, we need to use a “SET OF” defining characteristics of species. There are many crossovers in God world. There is no black and white, those colors do not exists.

Click to expand...

Scientists set up rules so there can be a consensus amongst themselves, so there would be a point of agreement for further discussions. Nothing wrong with that.

Its just that they do not know the bounds of what they are dealing with at times. They tend to dream and imagine of what they wish were reality. It brings out the little boy in them. Like space aliens living on planets galaxies away. The Bible is a kill joy for that as well. But it will make for a great cover up for when the Rapture takes place, when Christians are suddenly "beamed up" and no longer seen. What an exciting time for fantasy come true, it will be for those so inclined.

Keep in mind … I am not a biologist ...

Click to expand...

If you can locate a copy of -



You will find that there are many quotes by biologists (who are not Christians) who would see what the evolutionists here accept as being scientifically ludicrous. They make their assertions in the light of what science can now know about biological life. Its a good read. The man who wrote it is a scientist... He is no proponent of either young earth, nor GAP theory. He is simply dealing with scientific data and what the experts have seen who do not profess any particular belief in God.



.
In Christ, GeneZ



.

Of course the difficulty in defining species is evidence for evolution. It is only because species are in evolutionary flux that they are so hard to pin down. If animals were all grouped in rigid unchanging kinds there would be no difficulty in telling them apart.

Assyrian said:

Of course the difficulty in defining species is evidence for evolution. It is only because species are in evolutionary flux that they are so hard to pin down. If animals were all grouped in rigid unchanging kinds there would be no difficulty in telling them apart.

Click to expand...

The real question is... Will canines stop being dogs? Will felines stop being cats? God created the ability for a species to evolve. But he did not create frogs to eventually become birds.

How is God's Divine mind revealed in the evolutionary process?




That verse reveals that God already knew all our needs before they are manifested. His attribute of omniscience is revealed. And, as was shown with the change of finch beaks that Darwin is so famous for having recorded. Harvard scientists have since found that those finches are genetically predisposed to make such changes. It could be seen as a chameleon was always observed on a brown background, but when removed from the habitat they were found in, to see a change in color when placed in an environment with green hues. Was that evolution? Or, God always had this innate ability inborn that remained latent until properly stimulated by the change? Evolution is God's way of showing he always knew what was to come.

As far as Darwin having found on different islands, finches having different types of beaks that was best suited for their environment? God did likewise with mankind when he broke men off into different nations and races at the Tower of Babel.

Instead of beaks? God segregated different men by means of having each group have their own language. I also believe that God transformed men's physical attributes after they had migrated to different parts of the world for them to be best suited to survive in whatever eco-system they found themselves ordained of God. This change also helped God to achieve his desired effect of keeping men separated into nations. We can see God producing rapid physical change in the example of the serpent being transformed instantly into a creature destines to crawl on its scutes.

The answers are all to be found in the Bible. But! Its not for those who want to have everything spelled out for them in black and white. God's system requires a believer to first have a love of knowledge for God's Word. After knowledge is gained, then the Holy Spirit can lead such a believer into wisdom and insight to find answers.




Some may find this counter to what they have been taught in their churches.. but, a Christian's love is to abound in knowledge and insight. Not, in the sort of blind faith that is pumped up in mindless emotionalism.
Mindless emotionalism that adds up to being no more than religiously following the traditions of men. Beliefs that now divide Christians into the miriad of denominations we find so prevelant today.



In Christ, GeneZ





.

beardedad said:

As I stated in another forum I do not understand why any christen would believe evolution at all. To me saying you’re a Christian and an evolutionist is an oxymoron.

Click to expand...

I can answer only for myself. The reason why I’m an evolutionist is because that’s the process that God’s own Creation is showing us in which He creates new life forms. God's Creation is signed off by God's own hand. I think that's a pretty important thing to consider when talking about His Creaton.

feel like you can’t be both because it takes away from the very foundation of our Christian beliefs, that Jesus died for the sins of the world that was started by Adam & Eve.

Click to expand...

There are Christians “beliefs”….and than there is Jesus Christ. The two are not necessarily the same. For myself, it’s not what Jesus Christ died for that I love Him…it’s what He Lived for that feeds my heart and soul. His Love, His Compassion, His Forgiving Grace, His huge Heart for all of Humanity, Finding God, and more.

.

beardedad said:

As I stated in another forum I do not understand why any christen would believe evolution at all. To me saying you’re a Christian and an evolutionist is an oxymoron.

Click to expand...

I wish I could tell you in a more gentle way. But, its the ignorance you just revealed in your words that would leave the evolutionists no choice, but to see you as one who is minus the "oxy."

Do you know what evolution is? Just because certain evolutionists take a huge wrong leap in logic in regards to what evolution produces, it does not negate the reality that evolution (adaptive physical changes) does take place. Its a part of God's design. To state otherwise? That evolution does not take place? Would cause others who know it does to assume that you have evolved into an ostrich.

As I stated above the ideal that man came about from some other means then by God making him from the dust of the earth is absurd. Man has been around almost as long as the earth. Why would God not tell us, THE TRUTH as in we evolved, about how we came to be?

Click to expand...

But, in a sense, man has evolved. At one time man only spoke one language. Also, having only one common set of parents -Adam and Eve- one would have to assume that God ordained certain changes in man's structure as men of differing languages were scattered over the face of the earth. Eskimos were given one set of physical attributes that made them best to survive in their harsh environment. The Africans were given attributes which made him best suited for where he was ordained by God to first live.

God performed a type of change that evolutionist would claim as their own if they did not know God's power.


Here is an example:




It was not by means of godless evolution that the serpent's transformation took place. It did not take a million years. In an instant, God decreed this physical change, and it was done! Because, God has the power to do with his creation as he pleases!

God has ordained certain animals to have genetic "software" that are designed to change because of external stimuli. Now, God did not ordain a dog to become a cat. But he may have built into certain dogs genes the ability to change hair color when moved to a new location, or develop and change another physical attribute because God always knew that such changes would be needed over time. Men do not make a conscious effort to tan from the sun. But, if we never see sunshine in the right amounts? We would never know we can make such a change. Evolutionists never give God the credit where glory is due.

Do you think that we could not understand? The Mayans understood the heavens long before modern scientist did. The Egyptian and other civilizations understood how to cut, move and build great buildings, walls and other things with large stones that we have no clue how they did it with the tools we find that they had.

Click to expand...

Since they were pagan? Their inspiration may have come from more advanced levels of genius type demons.

Do you not think that if God told man that he was not created in a day we would not understand? I think not. Even back in Noah’s time men’s were not stupid. He built an ark with his own hands. Could you? Do you also not believe in The Garden? The bible states clearly that there was no sin until after Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil.

Click to expand...

The problem here is that some evolutionists have had grown up in a home where they encountered religion. But, they have never had a close encounter with Christ as knowing him personally as being alive. That's the problem. So, by telling them what the Bible says on certain matters, and expecting them to bow down as if they are knowing Christ? Would be like a Muslim quoted to you the Quran concerning worshiping Allah, and then demand obeisance. It would have the same effect on you as what you do to some of the evolutionists here. They really do not believe God is real. They may say he is, but that's only so that they do not alienate the believer's too far from them.

In what you stated it reveals your lack of understanding on what the Bible teaches about the unbeliever by making such a demand on such a person. You are making a demand as if they already accepted God's Word and life in Christ. What you said does nothing to show how God's Word holds answers to their personal questions, or refutes what they wish to believe which is wrong. They can not believe God created Adam until AFTER receiving salvation. Obama can quote the Bible, but he does not know Christ. Such is how it is.




In Christ, GeneZ



.

LightSeaker said:

I can answer only for myself. The reason why I’m an evolutionist is because that’s the process that God’s own Creation is showing us in which He creates new life forms. God's Creation is signed off by God's own hand. I think that's a pretty important thing to consider when talking about His Creaton.


There are Christians “beliefs”….and than there is Jesus Christ. The two are not necessarily the same. For myself, it’s not what Jesus Christ died for that I love Him…it’s what He Lived for that feeds my heart and soul. His Love, His Compassion, His Forgiving Grace, His huge Heart for all of Humanity, Finding God, and more.

.

Click to expand...

But the two are the same. It is not that he lived for us but that he died for us. Without his death there is no reason for my living for him, for defending what I know is right. His living was good, but his death on the cross was where his compassion, his forgiving grace, his love for the world show more then his life before then. God did show his hand by his creations, but not the way most see it. His creations were complete from the first day, not to linger and work this way and that. Why limit him to just to start something, not making it whole and good from the stat as the Bible states.

LightSeaker said:

There are Christians “beliefs”….and than there is Jesus Christ. The two are not necessarily the same. For myself, it’s not what Jesus Christ died for that I love Him…it’s what He Lived for that feeds my heart and soul. His Love, His Compassion, His Forgiving Grace, His huge Heart for all of Humanity, Finding God, and more.

Click to expand...

Typical side step. How can you say you believe in Jesus Christ? And deny what the Bible says about Adam and Eve? Your Jesus would be a liar.




Jesus stated that Adam was real in that passage. For he quoted Adam's very words found in the Bible.


Jesus also said that Jonah was swallowed by a huge fish.







Why would Jesus perpetuate these lies, if they were lies?

There are Christians “beliefs”….and than there is Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

And, you are saying that the Jesus of Christian beliefs is not the same Jesus that you know?









.

beardedad said:

God did show his hand by his creations, but not the way most see it. His creations were complete from the first day, not to linger and work this way and that. Why limit him to just to start something, not making it whole and good from the stat as the Bible states.

Click to expand...

To me, God IS more complete and whole because He set the very foundations of life into motion. His Creation creates life. What could be more whole and complete?

And as God's own Creation shows us, what God created does change and evolve. So for a creation story, we either have an ancient middle-eastern desert tribes myths to rely upon, or God's own Creation itself. And personally I'll take what God's own Creation, signed of by the very hand of God, is showing us, thank you.

.

beardedad said:

But the two are the same. It is not that he lived for us but that he died for us. Without his death there is no reason for my living for him, for defending what I know is right. His living was good, but his death on the cross was where his compassion, his forgiving grace, his love for the world show more then his life before then. God did show his hand by his creations, but not the way most see it. His creations were complete from the first day, not to linger and work this way and that. Why limit him to just to start something, not making it whole and good from the stat as the Bible states.

Click to expand...

No,

There is reason, for you know him well enough now.

He did not die to save you, you are already saved. To have and save you would mean that he created you less than he indented. This is not the case, you are at least what he made you and it will bring him joy when you grow to be more than you are today.

His death did not save you; it paved the way for you.

Would you love him any less if he did not die?

If the answer is yes, then you never knew him. You will have uttered his name in vain upon your lips and he will not know you.

I know this is not the case for you.
You are life.

genez said:

As long as they keep rejecting the Bible, their conclusions will be entertaining and speculative as to why we find fossils. I think they really crave and enjoy this "entertaining" aspect. They have fun with it. The Bible would take away that toy, and they would need to then concentrate on being under the authority of God. Not so entertaining to many, because of all the foolish mindless examples of Christianity they had been exposed to in the past.





As we can witness to with some here.




Scientists set up rules so there can be a consensus amongst themselves, so there would be a point of agreement for further discussions. Nothing wrong with that.

Its just that they do not know the bounds of what they are dealing with at times. They tend to dream and imagine of what they wish were reality. It brings out the little boy in them. Like space aliens living on planets galaxies away. The Bible is a kill joy for that as well. But it will make for a great cover up for when the Rapture takes place, when Christians are suddenly "beamed up" and no longer seen. What an exciting time for fantasy come true, it will be for those so inclined.



If you can locate a copy of -

"Creation and Evolution"
By Alan Hayward.
Bethany House.​

You will find that there are many quotes by biologists (who are not Christians) who would see what the evolutionists here accept as being scientifically ludicrous. They make their assertions in the light of what science can now know about biological life. Its a good read. The man who wrote it is a scientist... He is no proponent of either young earth, nor GAP theory. He is simply dealing with scientific data and what the experts have seen who do not profess any particular belief in God.
.
In Christ, GeneZ


.

Click to expand...

Same to you Genez,
Take your bible away and you are lost.

I lose the Bible,
I am in Christ just the same
If the bible disappeared from the face of the Earth
We would still be in Christ.

It saddens me you are so locked to the flesh.
It is ok tho, we will meet in the same place.

genez said:

Typical side step. How can you say you believe in Jesus Christ? And deny what the Bible says about Adam and Eve? Your Jesus would be a liar.

Click to expand...

Yes, I take what the Bible say about Adam and Eve as a creation myth that came out of an ancient middle-eastern nomadic desert tribe and not as an actual fact of truth.

It's the text of the Bible, written by the hands of man, that you point towards as having issues, not Jesus Christ. As experienced, Jesus Christ IS life and Truth.

.

genez said:

And, you are saying that the Jesus of Christian beliefs is not the same Jesus that you know?

Click to expand...

I'm saying that Christian beliefs and Jesus Christ are two different things.

.