If creationism is true, then why is it useless?

[HitchSlap]

Isn't it amazing...

Also, claiming to have 'studied' or 'read about' something for 'X years' is also apparently some sort of qualification to be considered an authority on all things in creationland.

i just don't get it.

You have to keep in mind that the average Christian is told creationism is true from the pulpit, where preacher's hold sway over the minds of the flock. So this is taken as 'gospel truth,' and usually never investigated for themselves.

 

[keith99]

You have to keep in mind that the average Christian is told creationism is true from the pulpit, where preacher's hold sway over the minds of the flock. So this is taken as 'gospel truth,' and usually never investigated for themselves.

That is not true. Almost no European Christians are told that and my recollection of mainstream Christian preaching in the U.S. is that it is almost never mentioned from the pulpit.

It is just a very loud minority of mainly American Christians that preach this.

 

[HitchSlap]

That is not true. Almost no European Christians are told that and my recollection of mainstream Christian preaching in the U.S. is that it is almost never mentioned from the pulpit.

It is just a very loud minority of mainly American Christians that preach this.

Thanks for the clarification. To be clear, in American churches where literal G1/2 creationism is believed, my statement is true.

 

[keith99]

Thanks for the clarification. To be clear, in American churches where literal G1/2 creationism is believed, my statement is true.

Oh definitely, and in most it is hammered as if salvation depends on believing in Creationism rather than believing in Christ.

 

[HitchSlap]

Oh definitely, and in most it is hammered as if salvation depends on believing in Creationism rather than believing in Christ.

Yes, the flock is told that if they don't accept literal G1/2, you can't accept the rest of the bible.

 

[Speedwell]

Oh definitely, and in most it is hammered as if salvation depends on believing in Creationism rather than believing in Christ.

We have had a couple of posters to this board recently who actually claimed that not only was belief in YEC necessary for salvation, it was sufficient. Really weirded me out to hear something like from a Christian.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I've been struggling to figure out the applications for creationism. Besides theme parks and merchandising, there doesn't appear to be anything else.

Why no biological applications? Or any other areas of applied science?

I mean, if creationism was true, wouldn't they have figured out a way to use it with respect to applied biology, geology, etc, by now? What's the hold up?

...from my vantage point, the term "creationism" should simply be viewed as a term associated with Biblical revelation (not the book). It's use would then be in our having a concept by which to understanding that God has something to do with the existence of our world. And while He kept to Himself exactly what that 'something' is, this concept feeds into our further understanding that He is not only Creator of all things other than Himself, but also the Sustainer of it all. In other words, He has the power to bring about the existence matter and life (... we know not how precisely), and hence, He has the power to resurrect us when our individual physical bodies expire and give out their last breath.

So, Creationism shouldn't be foisted by Christians as a term that contains specific 'scientific' meaning. Rather, it's use is in directing our attention to spiritual and existential matters of personal, even eschatological import (i.e. this is a more BioLogos kind of way of seeing "Creationism.")

Here's a very brief article by Anna Korver that is related to the OP--maybe you'll might get something out of it.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[Motherofkittens]

Adam was the first farmer. Before Adam we are told: "there was no man to cultivate the ground" (Genesis 2:4)Adam was not a food gather, Adam was a food producer. If you study botany and the domestication of ancient plants in the middle east you will be able to see the difference between an Ancient Plant and a cultivated plant. This is what Noah saved the cultivated plants that God put in the Garden if Eden for Adam to tend and take care of. This is what your Biology book calls a bio diverse Eco system. There are many many Eco systems in the biosphere. Noah ONLY saved ONE of them. He saved ONE bio diverse Eco system. Not all of them. Their world was one Eco system in the Tigris Euphrates river valley.

Thanks for the explanation. I reread it multiple times. Sorry, I am still confused, about something else now, who was it from 20,000 years ago who were, as you wrote [paraphrasing] "grinding the ancient grains on mill stones" I understand you think it was not domesticated plants. But wouldn't that still count as "cultivating the ground" and them being humans (as the evidence does show that)? The domestication of plants (that we know of, it probably goes much further back) is older then 6,000 years ago. So, how does that all work?

 

[Gene2memE]

Thanks for the explanation. I reread it multiple times. Sorry, I am still confused, about something else now, who was it from 20,000 years ago who were, as you wrote [paraphrasing] "grinding the ancient grains on mill stones".

No false modesty, but that was probably me. I've written on here multiple times that there's good evidence cultivation of small scale proto-cereal crops about 23,000 years ago, at a site on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, as well as evidence of stone tool use for harvesting and grinding.

There's also good evidence of small scale sedentary (year-round) settlement, with a combination of hunter-gathering and farming proto-domesticated crops in Jordan's Black Desert area about 15,000 years ago, and possibly as far back as 18,000 years ago.

Even more recently, there's evidence of domestication of yams and selective breeding of c in the Papua New Guinea highlands almost 50,000 years ago.

I understand you think it was not domesticated plants. But wouldn't that still count as "cultivating the ground" and them being humans (as the evidence does show that)? The domestication of plants (that we know of, it probably goes much further back) is older then 6,000 years ago. So, how does that all work?

It doesn't. You know that. I know that. But someone else doesn't.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Thanks for the explanation. I reread it multiple times. Sorry, I am still confused, about something else now, who was it from 20,000 years ago who were, as you wrote [paraphrasing] "grinding the ancient grains on mill stones" I understand you think it was not domesticated plants. But wouldn't that still count as "cultivating the ground" and them being humans (as the evidence does show that)? The domestication of plants (that we know of, it probably goes much further back) is older then 6,000 years ago. So, how does that all work?

There is a group of people that came out of Africa around 45,000 years ago. We find a lot of artifacts from this period of time and one of the artifacts we find are mill stones. We also find sowing needles, fishing hooks (made from bone) and fishing nets. They were able to spin fibers from the Fig plant into thread and weave the thread into cloth. Then they made clothing from the cloth. The oldest preserved clothing comes from bogs in Europe. Usually clothing is very thin and not very well preserved and leaves little over the years to examine.

Then around 12,980 years ago a new group of people began to emerge. There was a mass extinction that took place at the time follow by a radiation or a population explosion. This was the end of the ice age and the beginning of global warming. This was when the mammoths and saber tooth tigers went extinct. https://tarpits.org/

Around 6,000 (5,980) we find Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. God put them there to tend the garden. This is what they call the neolithic revolution. Or farming revolution. They were able to cultivate the ground and they used irrigation to water the plants.

Even in the last 50 years there has been a lot of advances. The worlds population continues to grow because of modern farming that allows us to feed a lot more people. Back in the 1930's they had the dust bowl and this was a real problem for them. Now we have modern irrigation and we are able to resolve the issues and problems they had.

When I was a kid it was real popular to read the book: "The Grapes of Wrath". There was a exodus from the farm to the city because modern farming did not need as much labor. They young men had to go to the city to find a job in the factories and this was the industrial revolution .

The Grapes of Wrath at a Glance. John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, Tom Joad and his family are forced from their farm in the Depression-era Oklahoma Dust Bowl and set out for California along with thousands of others in search of jobs, land, and hope for a brighter future.

 

[Motherofkittens]

There is a group of people that came out of Africa around 45,000 years ago. We find a lot of artifacts from this period of time and one of the artifacts we find are mill stones. We also find sowing needles, fishing hooks (made from bone) and fishing nets. They were able to spin fibers from the Fig plant into thread and weave the thread into cloth. Then they made clothing from the cloth. The oldest preserved clothing comes from bogs in Europe. Usually clothing is very thin and not very well preserved and leaves little over the years to examine.

Then around 12,980 years ago a new group of people began to emerge. There was a mass extinction that took place at the time follow by a radiation or a population explosion. This was the end of the ice age and the beginning of global warming. This was when the mammoths and saber tooth tigers went extinct. https://tarpits.org/

Around 6,000 (5,980) we find Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. God put them there to tend the garden. This is what they call the neolithic revolution. Or farming revolution. They were able to cultivate the ground and they used irrigation to water the plants.

Even in the last 50 years there has been a lot of advances. The worlds population continues to grow because of modern farming that allows us to feed a lot more people. Back in the 1930's they had the dust bowl and this was a real problem for them. Now we have modern irrigation and we are able to resolve the issues and problems they had.

When I was a kid it was real popular to read the book: "The Grapes of Wrath". There was a exodus from the farm to the city because modern farming did not need as much labor. They young men had to go to the city to find a job in the factories and this was the industrial revolution .

The Grapes of Wrath at a Glance. John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, Tom Joad and his family are forced from their farm in the Depression-era Oklahoma Dust Bowl and set out for California along with thousands of others in search of jobs, land, and hope for a brighter future.

Okay, thanks for the reply. My next question, is of course going to be why doesn't Genesis say any of that?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Okay, thanks for the reply. My next question, is of course going to be why doesn't Genesis say any of that?

Moses had all of God's plan of salvation. Nothing has been added.

 

[Motherofkittens]

Moses had all of God's plan of salvation. Nothing has been added.

What? I have read the whole bible, different versions, translations and some parts in other languages. From what I can tell you have added, and a lot at that.

I'm not alone thinking that either, because most Christians don't accept your interpretation. You're the only one I know of who does.

Edited. Autocorrect and dyslexia are horrible!

 

[Ophiolite]

There is a group of people that came out of Africa around 45,000 years ago. We find a lot of artifacts from this period of time and one of the artifacts we find are mill stones. We also find sowing needles, fishing hooks (made from bone) and fishing nets. They were able to spin fibers from the Fig plant into thread and weave the thread into cloth. Then they made clothing from the cloth. The oldest preserved clothing comes from bogs in Europe. Usually clothing is very thin and not very well preserved and leaves little over the years to examine.

Then around 12,980 years ago a new group of people began to emerge. There was a mass extinction that took place at the time follow by a radiation or a population explosion. This was the end of the ice age and the beginning of global warming. This was when the mammoths and saber tooth tigers went extinct. La Brea Tar Pits and Museum

Around 6,000 (5,980) we find Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. God put them there to tend the garden. This is what they call the neolithic revolution. Or farming revolution. They were able to cultivate the ground and they used irrigation to water the plants.

Even in the last 50 years there has been a lot of advances. The worlds population continues to grow because of modern farming that allows us to feed a lot more people. Back in the 1930's they had the dust bowl and this was a real problem for them. Now we have modern irrigation and we are able to resolve the issues and problems they had.

When I was a kid it was real popular to read the book: "The Grapes of Wrath". There was a exodus from the farm to the city because modern farming did not need as much labor. They young men had to go to the city to find a job in the factories and this was the industrial revolution .

The Grapes of Wrath at a Glance. John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, Tom Joad and his family are forced from their farm in the Depression-era Oklahoma Dust Bowl and set out for California along with thousands of others in search of jobs, land, and hope for a brighter future.

You employ an interesting rhetorical technique. I wonder if it is conscious or unconscious. I fear it may fool some readers, so it may be worthwhile examing it briefly.

• Maintain a serious and consistent tone while making two categories of statement.
• The first category are statements that are factual and generally accepted. These constitute the majority of the text.
• Intersperse these with statements that are highly speculative, or even demonstrably wrong
• Ensure that there is incidental overlap between both categories.
  
• Imply that the factual nature of the first category statements supports the "truth" of the second category statements.
  
• Avoid any attempt to probe that relationship, since the relationship is irrelevant to your argument.

I look forward to a response that follows the same technique and completely fails to address my assertions.

In the meantime, you also said this, in relation to young men abandoning the countryside during the Great Depression:

They young men had to go to the city to find a job in the factories and this was the industrial revolution .

No, Joshua. That was not the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution began a century and a half earlier. Why do you make such egregious errors then, generally, fail to either admit to them, or attempt to defend them?

Edit: corrected some careless typing errors.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What? I have read the whole bible, different versions, translations and some parts in other languages. From what I can tell you have added, and a lot at that.

I do not add to the Bible. I study Science and History so we can add to our understanding of the Bible. Many people believe that we live in a time when: "knowledge will increase." Daniel 12:4. We have to go where the evidence (artifacts) takes us. Archaeology has done a lot in the last 100 years to study ancient ruins and help us to better understand the Bible.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Intersperse these with statements that are highly speculative, or even demonstrably wrong

Science is based on the hypothesis. The issue is you have to follow though to see if there is any substance or evidence for what your wanting to say. I spent many years trying to find evidence for the physical Garden of Eden. I have studied science, history and the Bible. You have to go where the evidence takes you no matter how strange that maybe to people. The story in the Bible of Adam and Eve is pretty strange to begin with. Talking snakes and a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. What does that mean or represent? I am not really sure. But we do the best we can with what we have to work with to try and make sense out of it. Look at the snake in the Bible. We are told the snake shall eat the dust of the earth. Worms eat dust and that makes me wonder just what the snake in the Garden looked like before and after Adam's fall.

The issue of Adam being a real story is a bit different. We have actual genealogies. We have stories about these people in the genealogies. We read stories about Abraham's son with the free women and Abraham's son with the slave women. These people are all related and they all have a story to tell.

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, Joshua. That was not the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution began a century and a half earlier.

I already explained this to you and now you wanting me to explain it to you again. The industrial revolution did not happen in a year, it is a era that is taking place over a period of time. This is what causes so much confusion for people. They do not grasp the scientific concept that it could have taken God hundreds of thousands of years to create Adam and eve and the garden of Eden. Motion pictures are made from a series of photographs. The Bible maybe a snap shot in time but we are still looking at events over a period of time. Kat Kerr talks about the dinosaurs and how they devoured each other back in Pangaea. There is a connection between Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and what took place back in Pangaea.

1,000 years from now everyone will understand this stuff. We are able to understand some of it now to offer continuity for the people that are not yet born. Just like the people in the Bible leave us a record of what God did in their life in their day. For example David in the 119 Psalm came to a understand of the law of God and how that is to effect us and our lives today. I learned from him something that a lot of people today still do not understand.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I have read the whole bible,

I have read the Bible at least 5 times and I have studied ancient history and science for at least 50 years. There is no conflict between history, science and the Bible. They are in agreement with each other. This is how we know that the Bible is 100% accurate and true.

 

[pitabread]

I already explained this to you and now you wanting me to explain it to you again. The industrial revolution did not happen in a year, it is a era that is taking place over a period of time.

He's right, you've mixed up your time periods.

You referenced the 'industrial revolution' in relation to the Grapes of Wrath, which was set during the 1930's Great Depression. Whereas, the Industrial Revolution took place in the late 1700's to early 1800's.

 

[Ophiolite]

I already explained this to you and now you wanting me to explain it to you again. The industrial revolution did not happen in a year, it is a era that is taking place over a period of time. This is what causes so much confusion for people.

There is almost nothing you post that is grounded in reality. The confusion is in your mind.

1. You have not previously explained this to me. You may have posted remarks about it in this or other threads, but they were not obviously directed to me. Your posts are generally so unrelated to prior discussions that it impossible to follow any logical sequence through them - possibly because there are none.

2.Your notion of the industrial revolution is not one that historians would accept. Given the choice between views held by thousands of historians who have devoted their lives to elucidating the nature of the industrial revolution and an anonymous person on the internet who spouts interminable nonsense, guess which way I am going to go.

3. While I will fully concede that the industrial revolution continues in one sense it is completely wrong (crazy?) to select a minor part of that continuance and call it - as you did - the industrial revolution. If that were done deliberately in order to support an argument, rather than as a consequence of sloppy scholarship, then it would be called lying. Fortunately for you I am reasonably sure it is sloppy scholarship.

4. Please stop making connections that don't exist outside your own misinterpretation of history, science, the Bible and most other aspects of reality.