I have started to think, maybe the principle of Evolution is true: at a specific point

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So yes, I may have developed a quirky Genesis of my own, but essentially my understanding of the timeline of Creation is this:

The word of God.
The vibration of the Word of God.
Entanglement in the vibration of the Word of God.
Materialisation in the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Orbit in the Materialisation of the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Meteor showers of water and building blocks of life (amino acids) in the Orbit...
Lightning and ions mixing with the building blocks of life.
Spasmodal male and female cells in the mud affected by lightning and ions.
The first parents growing from the male and female cells.
Creation feeding on the fruit of Creation.
Temptation to feed on the flesh of Creation.
Creation responding to God to mitigate the development of the Devil's work in Creation.

So yes, it is a little vague (no where near as beautiful as the beginning in John!), but the point is there is a brief moment where male and female cells are everywhere, multiplying without growing big (without growing into fully fledged bodies). In a sense that is where Evolution operates: when masses of change are necessary, to the creation that has yet to take on design. What I am saying is "Evolution provokes life to take on design and the fact that the build up of male and female cells builds up to the right level: is credit to God!" God effectively creates the male and female cells and then sets out the range of their influence: between being and having range all creatures are able to respond to God in unique and different ways (even the serpent was originally able to stand eye to eye with men). Specifically God's Creation responds to His Word in different ways.

In other words, Evolution works in a pre-identification state, determining the possibilities subsequent kinds can express (while referencing that pre-identification state). How well that pre-identification state is referenced, comes to be the pre-eminent question on the mind of a prospective mate's Evolution.

Evolutionists are looking for other Evolutionists to marry!

 

[d taylor]

It is interesting how believers continue to entertain the lie of evolution. That should have been shot down at the doors of churches years ago when this nonsense came about.

The evolution should have been left to the godless scientist and atheist to entertain themselves.

 

[Monk Brendan]

It is interesting how believers continue to entertain the lie of evolution. That should have been shot down at the doors of churches years ago when this nonsense came about.

The evolution should have been left to the godless scientist and atheist to entertain themselves.

Whether it's by direct creation or God working through natural processes that He Himself set up (called by some evolution), it's still God doing it.

How God's unmaterial, timeless, and boundless "Fiat!" fits into the created universe of space, time and matter, is a mystery we will never understand in this life.

In the next we won't care.

 

[Gottservant]

"a mystery [] in the next we won't care [for]"

Very true brother, you have set my sights on the Lord!

 

[-57]

How does evolution explain original sin?

Answer.....it can't

 

[d taylor]

The sciences (if they can actually be call that) of evolution, globe earth, universe etc..

Are like smoking, drug abuse, alcoholism

Many people have been hooked on to these sciences (especially non believers and also many believers)
So when God reveals the truth during their life time, when ever that time may come. Be it during the tribulation described in Revelation or possibly before that time.
But when God does expose the lies (of science) many of those people will be be so ingrained with the lie.

They will curse God, instead of humbling themselves and believe in God for life.

So just like the addict, they just can not let go of what they believed in, even though it means their eternal destiny is at stake.

And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a talent. Men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail, since that plague was exceedingly great.

 

[stevevw]

Hi there,

So yes, I may have developed a quirky Genesis of my own, but essentially my understanding of the timeline of Creation is this:

The word of God.
The vibration of the Word of God.
Entanglement in the vibration of the Word of God.
Materialisation in the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Orbit in the Materialisation of the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Meteor showers of water and building blocks of life (amino acids) in the Orbit...
Lightning and ions mixing with the building blocks of life.
Spasmodal male and female cells in the mud affected by lightning and ions.
The first parents growing from the male and female cells.
Creation feeding on the fruit of Creation.
Temptation to feed on the flesh of Creation.
Creation responding to God to mitigate the development of the Devil's work in Creation.

So yes, it is a little vague (no where near as beautiful as the beginning in John!), but the point is there is a brief moment where male and female cells are everywhere, multiplying without growing big (without growing into fully fledged bodies). In a sense that is where Evolution operates: when masses of change are necessary, to the creation that has yet to take on design. What I am saying is "Evolution provokes life to take on design and the fact that the build up of male and female cells builds up to the right level: is credit to God!" God effectively creates the male and female cells and then sets out the range of their influence: between being and having range all creatures are able to respond to God in unique and different ways (even the serpent was originally able to stand eye to eye with men). Specifically God's Creation responds to His Word in different ways.

In other words, Evolution works in a pre-identification state, determining the possibilities subsequent kinds can express (while referencing that pre-identification state). How well that pre-identification state is referenced, comes to be the pre-eminent question on the mind of a prospective mate's Evolution.

Evolutionists are looking for other Evolutionists to marry!

I like your way of thinking. I too think there is a lot of power and creative ability in the 'word' mentioned in John 1. From what you are describing I see it as the 'word' being the ultimate ancestor of ancestors. Just like some credit the single-cell being the universal common ancestor that was created in theistic evolution maybe each cell has the signature for life and going back to the 'word' it contained the signature of all creation.

This fits in with John 1 in that all that was made came from the 'word' and contained the signature of life and existence. Nothing that was made without the 'word'. The 'word' being another aspect of God's creative powers. But what I find most interesting and I might be going off on a bot of a tangent is when John speaks about life being in the 'word' and that life was the light of all mankind.

Through him all things were made; without him, nothing was made that has been made and in him was life. These are powerful words that speak about the creation of existence and life from something immaterial. So regardless of how we try to understand how the material world and life came to be, it didn't happen from nothing and nothing cannot make something. We should expect to see the signature of life in all that we see.

 

[coffee4u]

Hi there,

So yes, I may have developed a quirky Genesis of my own, but essentially my understanding of the timeline of Creation is this:

The word of God.
The vibration of the Word of God.
Entanglement in the vibration of the Word of God.
Materialisation in the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Orbit in the Materialisation of the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Meteor showers of water and building blocks of life (amino acids) in the Orbit...
Lightning and ions mixing with the building blocks of life.
Spasmodal male and female cells in the mud affected by lightning and ions.
The first parents growing from the male and female cells.
Creation feeding on the fruit of Creation.
Temptation to feed on the flesh of Creation.
Creation responding to God to mitigate the development of the Devil's work in Creation.

None of that is in Genesis. You are free to make up whatever you like, but that is not God's word and nothing in God's word hints at those things.

 

[Oaktree125]

I agree to try and think outside the box- some dont agree that Scripturally we are already outside the box! While we are perfectly willing as Christians to let God do supernatural things, we dig in our heels when they appear to be more that we can logically pass and be processed by our minds.
As such I find it fitting that we dont observe the exact details of Scripture in nature because - quite literally - God destroys what He did. Obviously the presence of Noah and the animals in theark must carry on certain parameters but realistically the Noachian flood exactly describes the closing back over of the waters of Genesis 1 and as clearly as Scripture can spell out God says "Do over!" becuase of original sin that finds a foothold and takes over. It should be a no-brainer that Creation prior to Noahs Flood and what we see are different.
God put us out of the box- see? Everything we measure and interact with was caused by god during the Flood. That it only lasted <1 year for Noah but was zillions of years outside is a well documented property of nature - see Einsteins twin paradox- THAT there can be separate reference frames is at least possible.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Hi there,

So yes, I may have developed a quirky Genesis of my own, but essentially my understanding of the timeline of Creation is this:

The word of God.
The vibration of the Word of God.
Entanglement in the vibration of the Word of God.
Materialisation in the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Orbit in the Materialisation of the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Meteor showers of water and building blocks of life (amino acids) in the Orbit...
Lightning and ions mixing with the building blocks of life.
Spasmodal male and female cells in the mud affected by lightning and ions.
The first parents growing from the male and female cells.
Creation feeding on the fruit of Creation.
Temptation to feed on the flesh of Creation.
Creation responding to God to mitigate the development of the Devil's work in Creation.

So yes, it is a little vague (no where near as beautiful as the beginning in John!), but the point is there is a brief moment where male and female cells are everywhere, multiplying without growing big (without growing into fully fledged bodies). In a sense that is where Evolution operates: when masses of change are necessary, to the creation that has yet to take on design. What I am saying is "Evolution provokes life to take on design and the fact that the build up of male and female cells builds up to the right level: is credit to God!" God effectively creates the male and female cells and then sets out the range of their influence: between being and having range all creatures are able to respond to God in unique and different ways (even the serpent was originally able to stand eye to eye with men). Specifically God's Creation responds to His Word in different ways.

In other words, Evolution works in a pre-identification state, determining the possibilities subsequent kinds can express (while referencing that pre-identification state). How well that pre-identification state is referenced, comes to be the pre-eminent question on the mind of a prospective mate's Evolution.

Evolutionists are looking for other Evolutionists to marry!

First you need to ask why they ignore science....

You see we live in a universe increasing in acceleration when God “stretched out the heavens”. Yet the one and only science we have that deals with changes to time and lengths with changes in velocity is completely ignored in this universe increasing in acceleration.

So let’s say we have a pipe with a decreasing rate of flow over time. Then we look at the amount of water in the pool (parent/daughter ratios). And from this amount we calculate the constant rate backwards to determine how long it took to fill the pool. Being that we don’t adjust for an increasing rate in the past, our calculations of how long it took the water to reach its current level are vastly overestimated.

This is why astronomers are constantly surprised to find fully formed galaxies and galaxy clusters where none should exist. These processes occurred faster in the past. But since they ignore Relativity in a universe increasing in acceleration these observations instead of express predictions become anomalies and falsifications.

They are taking a decay rate that has slowed over time due to the increasing acceleration of the universe and using the slower rate of today to calculate a constant rate backwards. This leads to a vast overestimation of the time involved as they are not accounting for a faster decay rate in the past.

Atheists and evolutionists say they follow science but then totally ignore the one and only science we have that deals with time and length changes with changes to velocity in a universe increasing in acceleration..... They only give lip service to Relativity while ignoring its consequences.

 

[Jesusfann777888]

Hi there,

So yes, I may have developed a quirky Genesis of my own, but essentially my understanding of the timeline of Creation is this:

The word of God.
The vibration of the Word of God.
Entanglement in the vibration of the Word of God.
Materialisation in the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Orbit in the Materialisation of the Entanglement of the vibration of the Word of God.
Meteor showers of water and building blocks of life (amino acids) in the Orbit...
Lightning and ions mixing with the building blocks of life.
Spasmodal male and female cells in the mud affected by lightning and ions.
The first parents growing from the male and female cells.
Creation feeding on the fruit of Creation.
Temptation to feed on the flesh of Creation.
Creation responding to God to mitigate the development of the Devil's work in Creation.

So yes, it is a little vague (no where near as beautiful as the beginning in John!), but the point is there is a brief moment where male and female cells are everywhere, multiplying without growing big (without growing into fully fledged bodies). In a sense that is where Evolution operates: when masses of change are necessary, to the creation that has yet to take on design. What I am saying is "Evolution provokes life to take on design and the fact that the build up of male and female cells builds up to the right level: is credit to God!" God effectively creates the male and female cells and then sets out the range of their influence: between being and having range all creatures are able to respond to God in unique and different ways (even the serpent was originally able to stand eye to eye with men). Specifically God's Creation responds to His Word in different ways.

In other words, Evolution works in a pre-identification state, determining the possibilities subsequent kinds can express (while referencing that pre-identification state). How well that pre-identification state is referenced, comes to be the pre-eminent question on the mind of a prospective mate's Evolution.

Evolutionists are looking for other Evolutionists to marry!

reasons evolution is false:

big bang:

1.) Conceptually associated with a universe that began or that has always existed.

A universe that has always existed is by definition and infinite loop of space matter and time and can not expierience change and is not subject to change. Time is a vector quantity of duration and infinite quantities evaluate a future length of time that is infinite.no.

The universe could not have began, as there is no cause in a series of causes that require their own to exist.no.

Space expanding violates the concept that space lacks physical dimension as it is not a scalar quantity or quality vector.

Evolution is false as a series of changes can not result from a composition of elements that have a basic subatomic structure that can not be more diverse than the degree by which their composition determines all successive probabilities which are limited based on initial quanity, aspect, and degree.

there are 300 species of ape and human beings are observable. The falsely proported transitional species that exist between ape and human beings are not. Because does pre-date both transitional and post-transitional assertions, intermediary species should exist in high populations comparable to the pre-transitional assertions and do not because evolution has no occured.

The concept originated from babylonian occultism which use the babylonian discuss, was transmitted to greece from Babylon by a babylonian names berossus from which the Greek monad or English singularity originated from which is represented a religious symbol that is common to all religion's but not Christianity as a result of the transmission of the babylonian religion that falsely asserted earth air wind and fire are the basic constitution of chemical substances that gradual change over a period of time.

Temperature also effects scale. Based on desity equations and geodesic equations and temperature at time of explosion scale would be effected proportionate to the temperature generated at the an event of an explosion which would effect subatomic geometry and scale of atoms.

Your not a flat 2-d person are you, no. Evolutions a farce.

You should study the composition of cellular organisms as their microvoltage and the structure and composition of their Poor's form arcs that create the trajectory for the electrochemical process to precisely and exactly generate aspects related to cell function. That equation can fill up an entire college classroom full of chalk boards. Precision is not the result of random consequence as any series of probabilities is proportionate to the basic sum of initial values.

What are you even talking about?

 

[Buzzard3]

How does evolution explain original sin?

Answer.....it can't

I can't see how evolution makes any difference to the story of Adam and Eve and original sin.

 

[coffee4u]

I can't see how evolution makes any difference to the story of Adam and Eve and original sin.

Well of course it does. Original sin is what caused death.

Evolution not only claims millions of years it also claims that death is the natural way of life. Scripture says that sin caused death. Animals can't sin only man can sin so how do you get millions of years of life and death before man even shows up on the evolutionary tree?

Apart from the fact God looked at his creation and called it very good, he did not look at millions of years of death and decay and call that very good. Death is Gods enemy, yet you think he let his enemy take part in shaping his creation? Because that is what you are saying. If God used evolution then he used his sworn enemy as part of his creating process and then looked at it and called it very good.

1 Corinthians 15
24Then the end will come, when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father after He has destroyed all dominion, authority, and power. 25For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

Revelation 20:14
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
It is going to be destroyed because it isn't part of God's plan, it came in.

If it can be taken out of existence because at some point it came into existence.
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin
Death in not a normal part of life but an enemy and while it's sting may have been dealt with by Christs death and resurrection on the cross, that is the spiritual death; the resurrection of the body and the new world and the destruction of physical death are yet to come.

 

[Buzzard3]

Original sin is what caused death.

Original sin caused the death of only Adam and Eve and their descendants, who were made in the image of God and therefore had the potential of immortality.

 

[coffee4u]

Original sin caused the death of only Adam and Eve and their descendants, who were made in the image of God and therefore had the potential of immortality.

Which is every living person on this planet.
If you are not Adam's descendant then you are lost and can't be saved, as this is who Jesus came and died for.

1 Corinthians 15:21-22
For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

I will repeat: anyone who believes God used evolution must also believe that God used his enemy as part of creating. That death occurred for millions of years and God called it "very Good" There is no way around the fact that death goes hand in hand with evolution.

 

[Buzzard3]

1 Corinthians 15:21-22
For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

Which part of that verse says animals did not die before Original sin?

I will repeat: anyone who believes God used evolution must also believe that God used his enemy as part of creating.

The "enemy" in the NT refers to the death of humans made in the image of God. It doesn't refer to the death of animals.

That death occurred for millions of years and God called it "very good".

God's idea of what is "very good" may be very different to your idea of what is "very good".

Btw, God described his creation before Adam - the evolution part - as "good", not "very good".

 

[coffee4u]

Which part of that verse says animals did not die before Original sin?

If death is the result of sin and only man can sin then how can there be death before man sinned? In the evolution model man comes onto the scene quite late.

All the animals were herbivores. Don't you at least find that interesting?
Genesis 1:30
And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
That alone is one clue pointing towards the immortality of all animals. They all ate plants before the fall, before the world corrupted into what we have now.

The "enemy" in the NT refers to the death of humans made in the image of God. It doesn't refer to the death of animals.

No one said that particular verse is talking about animals.
Its referring to death. All death. Sin brought about death, it is the cause of death.

God's idea of what is "very good" may be very different to your idea of what is "very good".

Exactly, Gods idea of very good would far far out way ours, yet you think God would be fine with his enemy literally helping him shape is creation.

Btw, God described his creation before Adam - the evolution part - as "good", not "very good".

He described his creating process as good, there is not a single mention of evolution in scripture, it is an invention of man. He still would not call anything connected to death as good. You think God is pleased with rotting flesh?

Have faith in science all you want but they are just fallen men who have not seen or experienced and never can how God created. All they have to work with is the corrupted groaning world which won't tell them anything about the world that was, that has gone. You should keep that in mind while you are championing them.

 

[Buzzard3]

If death is the result of sin and only man can sin then how can there be death before man sinned? In the evolution model man comes onto the scene quite late.

The death of all creatures before Adam was created was not due to sin ... only the death of humans made in the image of God was due to sin.
If Adam and Eve did not sin they would have lived forever - unlike all the other creatures, which were created and destined to die.

All the animals were herbivores. Don't you at least find that interesting?
Genesis 1:30
And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

Yes, that is interesting.

That alone is one clue pointing towards the immortality of all animals.

Possibly, but it does not say nor imply that animals didn't die ... and we know from the fossil record that they did die.

Exactly, Gods idea of very good would far far out way ours, yet you think God would be fine with his enemy literally helping him shape is creation.

God no doubt thought it "very good" - since it was his will - that his only begotten son be tortured for hours and then suffer a horrifying death on the cross.

there is not a single mention of evolution in scripture

I'm not surprised - it's completely irrelevant. The Bible is not a science book; it is concerned only with God's spiritual relationship to Adam and Eve and their decedants, so what happened on earth before Adam and Eve is of no theological or spiritual concern.

it is an invention of man.

No, evolution is actually an invention of our Creator. The fossil record tells us that and the rocks do not lie.

He still would not call anything connected to death as good.

God called his creation "good" because it was the physical manifestation of his divine will ... and it was his will that animals would die. (It could also be his will that, in Heaven, no animal dies.)

Have faith in science all you want but they are just fallen men who have not seen or experienced and never can how God created.

God has allowed millions of fossils to form, so God has provided us with a glimpse into the history of life on earth. That history is not falsified simply because you can't fit it into your superficial and unimaginative reading of Genesis.

All they have to work with is the corrupted groaning world which won't tell them anything about the world that was, that has gone.

The fossil record actually tells us quite a bit about "the world that was, that has gone".

I would be happy to believe that God created the world 6000 years ago and that animals did not die before Original sin, but God's creation itself (the fossil record) clearly tells us that is not what happened.

 

[coffee4u]

The death of all creatures before Adam was created was not due to sin ... only the death of humans made in the image of God was due to sin.
If Adam and Eve did not sin they would have lived forever - unlike all the other creatures, which were created and destined to die.

Why would they be destined to die? Why couldn't they be immortal? The earth was pure and perfect it was a shadow of the new word to come. When God says there will be no more death on the new earth he isn't going to have immortal humans surrounded by dying animals, nor would he have done that in Eden.
You have a strange view of God if you think he would smile and look out upon the dead rotting carcasses of animals and proclaim that "very good" .

Yes, that is interesting.

It is one indication not only of a vastly different world set up but a pointer to animals not dying. Now I am not saying that alone makes for a water tight argument for no death of animals, to me that is encapsulated in God calling his creation very good and that God calls death his enemy. It says that sin brought in death, I do not believe it existed at all before that. Also the world is said to be groaning now. Nature itself is groaning. If it wasn't groaning at creation what does that mean? A huge change occurred.
I think there is enough scripture to paint a picture of a prefect immortal world at creation. A world that was given to mankind as a taste or a foreshadowing of the world God plans to recreate at the end.
Isaiah 11:6
The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them.
It fits in all of scripture, flowing as one harmonious piece.

Possibly, but it does not say nor imply that animals didn't die ... and we know from the fossil record that they did die.

We believe they started to die at the fall and as for fossils we believe that to be mostly from the global flood.
The only reason people don't want to read Genesis or any of the other verses on creation literally is due to what science says. This is the crux of the matter. Nothing in scripture itself indicates it should be read otherwise.
Frequently through scripture God would cause something to happen which when looked back on people could say "this was a picture of this later thing" Like when the Israelite's placed blood on the doorway and ate lamb it was a picture of Christ. Just because it had a spiritual meaning didn't diminish it's being literal history.
A perfect creation-corrupted by man-later restored by Christ-to end in a perfect world fits. It is a complete circle.
Evolution doesn't fit in any way shape or form with the entirety of scripture. It's like a square block trying to be pushed through a round hole.
And the only reason for it is because fallen mankind has deemed it to be so from what he has tested. Yet he doesn't even have the world he is making claims about.

God no doubt thought it "very good" - since it was his will - that his only begotten son be tortured for hours and then suffer a horrifying death on the cross.

This is another thing, because death is so terrible it took God literally taking it on for us to save humanity. Perfect blood was needed. I think we all view death way too mildly and normally. Thinking that millions of yeas of death and decay are somehow okay shows just how little thought to it is given. God would never call something shaped by death as very good or even good.
This is why Jesus cried out "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
God doesn't plan to toss death and Hades into the lake of fire on a whim.

I'm not surprised - it's completely irrelevant. The Bible is not a science book; it is concerned only with God's spiritual relationship to Adam and Eve and their decedants, so what happened on earth before Adam and Eve is of no theological or spiritual concern.

Science is mans attempt to understand what he sees. Scripture is God telling us the truth about a thing, no experiments or testing or attempts at understanding needed. Events can be both spiritual and literal.
When science disagrees with the Bible it is because it is wrong, mankind is wrong.

No, evolution is actually an invention of our Creator. The fossil record tells us that and the rocks do not lie.

Nothing in scripture talks of evolution. Scripture is what God gave us to know him and what he has done. Evolution is mans invention, it is how he can live while pretending God doesn't exist.

The fossil record says nothing of the kind. There are fossils -that is a fact. 'Evolution' is merely the story mankind came up with to try and explain them.
God says otherwise, he says he brought a global flood, that is enough to explain fossils.
Again every time you claim evolution you may as well say "God used his sworn enemy death to shape his creation"
Makes as much sense as someone saying I asked my sworn enemy along to help me raise my children.

God called his creation "good" because it was the physical manifestation of his divine will ... and it was his will that animals would die. (It could also be his will that, in Heaven, no animal dies.)

Wrong, it was sin that caused it. God hates death. Do you think he calls this world groaning as a term of endearment? Do you think he plans to destroy it all by fire and reshape it due to how much he appreciates death?

God has allowed millions of fossils to form, so God has provided us with a glimpse into the history of life on earth. That history is not falsified simply because you can't fit it into your superficial and unimaginative reading of Genesis.

God brought about a global flood. He said everything outside the ark died.

The fossil record actually tells us quite a bit about "the world that was, that has gone".

At most the fossils can tell us a bit about animals who lived at the time of the flood. But this is years after the fall. It still shows nothing of the pre fall world. That has gone, nobody has access to it because it doesn't exist anymore. The world changed completely at the fall.

I would be happy to believe that God created the world 6000 years ago and that animals did not die before Original sin, but God's creation itself (the fossil record) clearly tells us that is not what happened.

The fossil record shows a record catastrophes, people simply want it to show evolution because this is what they believe in.
There are plenty of other articles showing the catastrophe explanation for fossils.
Also when you say it clearly tells us what you really mean is "It clearly told a secular fallen (probably aesthetic) scientist this is what it meant and I am taking his word on it." Because unless you are someone who actively goes out and looks at fossils yourself you are believing a book or a man who got up to speak. You are thinking back to high school science and the TV which continually expounds evolution. You listened and decided they were correct without even looking for other explanations, without even questioning it.

There are plenty of opposing views if you care to look instead of going along with the societal flow.

I don't believe I ever mentioned an age range. Not all YEC believe in 6 thousand years, that was from James Ussher. I tend to believe in 10-15. I think its rather unfortunate that James Usser has become the standard automatic go to and that everyone who thinks YEC goes to his model. I would never use his model, one because I don't agree with his theology, anyone who is arrogant enough to set a time and date(October 23, 4004 BC) is not someone to listen to, nor do I believe the Bible is a calculator. Another YEC article I saw which I no longer have used a 20-50 thousand year model. YEC vary like everyone else.

 

[Buzzard3]

The fossil record shows a record catastrophes, people simply want it to show evolution because this is what they believe in.

There's a lot of truth in what you say. It seems to me that atheists, especially, read into the fossil record want they want to see ... and most evolutionary scientists are atheists. What they want to believe is that life on earth did not need a Creator and is the result of a purely biological process that is now explained by science (Darwinism). So that is what they "see" in the fossil record ... while ignoring any evidence that contradicts their belief.

I'm not a Darwinist ... in fact I ignore most of what Darwinian scientists say. I think it's actually impossible to know what happened millions of years ago ... the fossil record only gives us snapshots of history. We don't what happened between Fossil A and Fossil B ... and we will never know and science can't prove anything. Scientists can come up with their "best scientific explanation", but that means absolutely nothing to me.

Also when you say it clearly tells us what you really mean is "It clearly told a secular fallen (probably aesthetic) scientist this is what it meant and I am taking his word on it."

No, that's not even close to what I mean. What I mean is, the fossil record clearly tells us that a literal reading of Genesis is incorrect.
I definitely didn't mean I agree with the accepted scientific explanation (Darwinism) for the fossil record ... bcoz I reject ALL scientific theories that attempt to explain the fossil record. My explanation for the fossil record is this: "God done it".

Because unless you are someone who actively goes out and looks at fossils yourself you are believing a book or a man who got up to speak.

That's true. Most people who believe in evolution have to assume that paleontologists and geologists are being objectively truthful and that their scientific claims are correct.

If it could be establised that these scientists are either liars or incompetent fools who don't know what they're doing, then I will re-access my views.

You are thinking back to high school science and the TV which continually expounds evolution. You listened and decided they were correct without even looking for other explanations, without even questioning it.

That's no doubt true of many people, but I always doubted evolution and once believed that life on earth had existed for no more than about 10,000 years. But the more I studied the science, the more I realized that my view was way wrong.

There are plenty of opposing views if you care to look instead of going along with the societal flow.

I know there are plenty of opposing views ... I've read plenty of creationist material and was even a subscriber to Creation.com magazine.

I don't believe I ever mentioned an age range. Not all YEC believe in 6 thousand years, that was from James Ussher. I tend to believe in 10-15 ...
Another YEC article I saw which I no longer have used a 20-50 thousand year model. YEC vary like everyone else.

Fair enough. I think Adam was created somewhere in the 10-20 range.