If common appearance = common DNA

[AV1611VET]

What is it with you guys and your home spun theology? You claim the Bible is the be all and end all and then go around making stuff up when you realize your position is untenable. Is the instruction about not adding to the bible one of those things you can ignore these days?

That bothers you, doesn't it?

The fact that we fill in the gaps with educated speculation?

What? you think your philosophy of evolution has a monopoly on missing links?

Would you like us to just quote Scripture and be done with it and leave you guys scratching your heads?

 

[bhsmte]

That bothers you, doesn't it?

The fact that we fill in the gaps with educated speculation?

What? you think your philosophy of evolution has a monopoly on missing links?

Would you like us to just quote Scripture and be done with it and leave you guys scratching your heads?

No bother. It is entertaining to observe though.

 

[bhsmte]

I go by Francis Collins. You can study up on that in his book:"The Language of God".
We believe that mutations are a part of the fallen condition of man and creation. We believe that Satan caused mutation. He wants to cause creation to destroy itself. Starting 200 million years ago with the dinosaurs in Pangea.

Who is "we"? Who else do you claim to be speaking for?

 

[AV1611VET]

No bother. It is entertaining to observe though.

It wouldn't be so entertaining though if all we did was either quote Scripture or say the Bible is silent on the subject, would it?

Why don't you just send out a memo to your peers ... something to this effect:

To: Scientific Methodists
Fm: bhsmte
Re: Questions

Please cease and desist asking questions that are not covered in the Scriptures. We users of the scientific method should be investigating before we communicate; and if a clear-cut answer to a question is not found in the Bible, don't ask it.

We, the educated elite, should set an example for our less knowledgeable targets by looking up the answer for ourselves. After all, if we are as smart as we want them to think we are, we should be doing the work ourselves and impressing them with it; not the other way around.

Failure to heed this memo could result in ad hominems, blasphemy, ridicule, and entertainment.

Hmmm ... on second thought ... kindly disregard. We don't want to incur the wrath of the muses.

Your partner in the lab, b.

 

[bhsmte]

It wouldn't be so entertaining though if all we did was either quote Scripture or say the Bible is silent on the subject, would it?

Why don't you just send out a memo to your peers ... something to this effect:

To: Scientific Methodists
Fm: bhsmte
Re: Questions

Please cease and desist asking questions that are not covered in the Scriptures. We users of the scientific method should be investigating before we communicate; and if a clear-cut answer to a question is not found in the Bible, don't ask it.

We, the educated elite, should set an example for our less knowledgeable targets by looking up the answer for ourselves. After all, if we are as smart as we want them to think we are, we should be doing the work ourselves and impressing them with it; not the other way around.

Failure to heed this memo could result in ad hominems, blasphemy, ridicule, and entertainment.

Hmmm ... on second thought ... kindly disregard. We don't want to incur the wrath of the muses.

Your partner in the lab, b.

LOL

 

[joshua 1 9]

I think that phrasing is interesting because it seems to remove any culpability from God.

We have a rock solid promise from God that He will cause all things to work together for good. I remember the first time I read the scripture that tells us to give thanks in all things. That was difficult for me to understand.

 

[joshua 1 9]

But also, curiously, since mutations are necessary for evolution, Satan is the source of evolution?

In order to defend their theory they call everything a mutation. For example they call frame shift a mutation. They do this to make it difficult to argue against the mutation theory. Creationism and Evolution has the same evidence to work with. In some cases they do arrive at different conclusions based on that evidence. Although I tend to go along with the TE teachings of Francis Collins and he is fairly well accepted.

 

[joshua 1 9]

"We believe that mutations are a part of the fallen condition of man and creation." Does that mean you are taking about "the fall" in the Garden of Eden? I'm not sure if I'm reading that right since you also say "starting with 200 million years ago with the dinosaurs."

This teaching comes from Kat Kerr and it is not very well accessible. It is around here somewhere on this forum. I will see if I can find it. I personally did a lot of study on the remains of dinosaurs that they found at Ghost Ranch. This is when creation developed teeth and began to devour each other. The belief is that this is the point in time that Satan and his followers were cast out of Heaven and down to the Earth. They say he was angry with God and began to do a work so that God's creation here on Earth would destroy itself. That is why in Galations 5:15 we are warned: "If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other."

 

[Gene Parmesan]

We have a rock solid promise from God that He will cause all things to work together for good. I remember the first time I read the scripture that tells us to give thanks in all things. That was difficult for me to understand.

Since it is all part of God's plan, it seems silly to simply blame Satan.

Now, if your version of God did not know what would happen prior to creating this universe, putting the blame on Satan makes sense. I'm not sure which version of God you subscribe to.

In order to defend their theory they call everything a mutation. For example they call frame shift a mutation. They do this to make it difficult to argue against the mutation theory. Creationism and Evolution has the same evidence to work with. In some cases they do arrive at different conclusions based on that evidence. Although I tend to go along with the TE teachings of Francis Collins and he is fairly well accepted.

Francis Collins is successful in his field because he doesn't appeal to God in the lab. His scientific papers don't say, "and here it is this way because God deemed it so." His view of the processes of the universe is consistent with a natural view as demonstrated in this quote:

'God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures'
If God is real, and I believe he is, then he is outside of nature. He is, therefore, not limited by the laws of nature in the way that we are. He's not limited by time. In the very moment of that flash in which the universe was created, an unimaginable burst of energy, God also had the plan of how that would coalesce into stars and galaxies, planets, and how life would arrive on a small planet near the outer rim of a spiral galaxy. And ultimately, over hundreds of millions of years, give rise to creatures with intelligence and in whom he could infuse this search for him and this knowledge of good and evil. And all of that happened in his mind in the blink of an eye. While it may seem to us that this whole process has the risk of randomness and, therefore, an unpredictable outcome, that was not the case for God.

To me, this is a much better view of an all powerful God creation rather than this tinkering kind that constantly has to adjust things.

This teaching comes from Kat Kerr and it is not very well accessible. It is around here somewhere on this forum. I will see if I can find it. I personally did a lot of study on the remains of dinosaurs that they found at Ghost Ranch. This is when creation developed teeth and began to devour each other. The belief is that this is the point in time that Satan and his followers were cast out of Heaven and down to the Earth. They say he was angry with God and began to do a work so that God's creation here on Earth would destroy itself. That is why in

I'd love to read about that. It sounds absolutely absurd. Haha

Galations 5:15 we are warned: "If you bite and devour each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other."

I mean, you can't really argue with that, can you?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Since it is all part of God's plan, it seems silly to simply blame Satan.

We were talking about the evolution of predictors.

Now, if your version of God did not know what would happen prior to creating this universe, putting the blame on Satan makes sense. I'm not sure which version of God you subscribe to.

We are told that "He was chosen before the creation of the world,". Also we are told that God knows the end from the beginning.

Isaiah 14:24
The LORD of hosts has sworn saying, "Surely, just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I have planned so it will stand,

Francis Collins says: "If God is real, and I believe he is, then he is outside of nature. He is, therefore, not limited by the laws of nature in the way that we are. He's not limited by time. In the very moment of that flash in which the universe was created, an unimaginable burst of energy, God also had the plan of how that would coalesce into stars and galaxies, planets, and how life would arrive on a small planet near the outer rim of a spiral galaxy. And ultimately, over hundreds of millions of years, give rise to creatures with intelligence and in whom he could infuse this search for him and this knowledge of good and evil. And all of that happened in his mind in the blink of an eye. While it may seem to us that this whole process has the risk of randomness and, therefore, an unpredictable outcome, that was not the case for God.

Read more at 'God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures'"

If anything the mutation theory is based on randomness. Only the Evo Devo people (Sean B Lewis) have a lot of confidence in the elements that make up life. They believe that anywhere in the universe life will be pretty much the same as what we see here on earth because of the Universal laws that govern the universe. This explains why we have great similarities among different species.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I'd love to read about that. It sounds absolutely absurd. Haha

She seems to write mostly for children but it is still interesting. Here is a link Kat Kerr - Powerful Testimonies of Heaven

 

[Gene Parmesan]

We were talking about the evolution of predictors.
We are told that "He was chosen before the creation of the world,". Also we are told that God knows the end from the beginning.

Isaiah 14:24
The LORD of hosts has sworn saying, "Surely, just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I have planned so it will stand,

Francis Collins says: "If God is real, and I believe he is, then he is outside of nature. He is, therefore, not limited by the laws of nature in the way that we are. He's not limited by time. In the very moment of that flash in which the universe was created, an unimaginable burst of energy, God also had the plan of how that would coalesce into stars and galaxies, planets, and how life would arrive on a small planet near the outer rim of a spiral galaxy. And ultimately, over hundreds of millions of years, give rise to creatures with intelligence and in whom he could infuse this search for him and this knowledge of good and evil. And all of that happened in his mind in the blink of an eye. While it may seem to us that this whole process has the risk of randomness and, therefore, an unpredictable outcome, that was not the case for God.

Read more at 'God Is Not Threatened by Our Scientific Adventures'"

If anything the mutation theory is based on randomness. Only the Evo Devo people (Sean B Lewis) have a lot of confidence in the elements that make up life. They believe that anywhere in the universe life will be pretty much the same as what we see here on earth because of the Universal laws that govern the universe. This explains why we have great similarities among different species.

I have no idea why I am replying. I feel like you skimmed my post. You even quoted the EXACT same Francis Collins quote as I did as if you were presenting new information. And on top of that, it refutes what you are claiming about Francis Collins, which makes me believe you also skimmed that as well. I'm not going to waste my time explaining this.

When studying life and the universe, it "may seem" random. From a natural perspective, that's what we see. Randomness enacted upon by selection filters. The enacting of design, under Collins' world view, happened right at the creation event. You are free to claim God created all of the natural and dependable laws of the universe at the point of creation (though it'll only ever be an assertion, IMO). There's no conflict there. We can explain all manner of things scientifically and this does nothing to disprove a deity.

 

[AV1611VET]

YEC, OEC, whatever - their arguments are all essentially the same.

Yup.

God did it by way of miracles.*

Is there something wrong with that?

* The exception would be theistic evolution, which takes a more of a deistic approach; unless it invokes guided evolution.

 

[AV1611VET]

That is their thing - All Praise, No Blame.

Didn't we just discuss this?

And for the record, praise is blame.

If I praise you for getting an A on your report card, I'm essentially blaming you for getting an A on your report card.

They don't like to admit it, but their words confirm it.

I hope so.

I blame God for sending the Flood and other things: it's called "catastrophism."

Another term you might not want to consider is: "dispensation theology," where God gets the credit/blame for: the Expulsion, the Flood, the Tower of Babel incident, the Egyptian captivity, the Cross, the Tribulation period, and the Great White Throne Judgment.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes - there is no actual evidence for any of it.

Ain't that a bummer?

Musta been a miracle then, eh?

Jesus walked right through a locked door; would you expect to find His fingerprints on the doorknob?

 

[joshua 1 9]

You cannot get any more specific than that?

I could but for the most part I am to lazy to do that. If your interested in his teaching you can read his books or read some of what he has online. Even there are some youtube video you could listen to.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I could but for the most part I am to lazy to do that. If your interested in his teaching you can read his books or read some of what he has online. Even there are some youtube video you could listen to.

You really should watch that video again, and attentively. Very clearly he believes science answers the "how" and faith is an attempt to answer the "why."

"My study of genetics certainly tells me incontrovertibly that Darwin was right about the nature of how living things have arrived on the scene by descent from a common ancestor under the influence of natural selection over very long periods of time. Darwin was amazingly insightful given how limited the molecular information he had was (essentially it didn't exist). Now with the digital code of DNA we have the best possible proof of Darwin's theory that he could have imagined."

He goes on to say this is an example of "how" rather than a "why."

"[...]and it's lack of probability of ever having happened and it does make you think that a mind might have been involved in setting the stage. At the same time that does not imply necessarily that that mind is controlling the specific manipulations of things that are going on in the natural world, in fact I would very much resist that idea. I think the laws of nature could potentially be the product of a mind, I think that's a defensible perspective; but once those laws are in place then I think nature goes on and science has the chance to be able to perceive how that works and what its consequences are."

I'm not saying you have to agree with him on everything, so I'm curious. Do you disagree with what he's saying here or not?