If there is "no evidence" for evolution...

[Jimmy D]

Today's Science is "willingly ignorant" of this because they have chosen to be Godless.

Demonstrably false accusation.

When the defence of your theology leads you to breaking your God's laws something has gone seriously awry.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

again: if we will change about million bases at once we will get a dog genome out from a cat genome. right?

No.

 

[Aman777]

Common ancestors are those creatures who were first made by Lord God/Jesus. They descend with modifications within His and Their kinds in a population over time. Today's Science is "willingly ignorant" of this because they have chosen to be Godless.

Demonstrably false accusation.

When the defence of your theology leads you to breaking your God's laws something has gone seriously awry.

False accusation, unless you can show us where today's Science accepts God's Holy Word as Truth. IOW, in order believe in today's Science, you MUST reject God's account in Genesis. In fact, God refers to such people as the Scoffers of the last days who are "willingly ignorant" that Adam's entire world was clean dissolved in the flood. That's God's Truth.

 

[Speedwell]

False accusation, unless you can show us where today's Science accepts God's Holy Word as Truth. IOW, in order believe in today's Science, you MUST reject God's account in Genesis.

No, only your interpretation of it.

 

[Aman777]

No, only your interpretation of it.

Does Science teach that there was no flood? Of course it does, since it is "willingly ignorant" of God's Truth. ll Peter 3:3-7 Try again?

 

[Speedwell]

Does Science teach that there was no flood? Of course it does, since it is "willingly ignorant" of God's Truth. ll Peter 3:3-7 Try again?

Not "willingly ignorant." Just indifferent to a shallow and theologically inadequate reading of an ancient Hebrew story.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

why? a mutation isnt a natural process?

But mutations designed to achieve a target such as a cat from a dog aren't natural. Natural mutations are random, not designed.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Read the following and see what you think:

Gen 2:4 ¶ These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

Lord God is YHWH/Jesus in the Old Testament. The above verse is speaking of the 3rd Day/Age when Jesus made Adam's Earth AND other HeavenS (plural)

Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

Plants, herbs and Trees GREW on the 3rd Day in the Creation. Gen 1:12 The above verse confirms that Scripture is speaking of the 3rd Day when Adam's Earth was made according to Gen 1:10.

Gen 2:7 ¶ And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Jesus formed or shaped man (Hebrew-Adam) on the 3rd Day, before the plants herbs and trees. If you don't believe me, read the next two verses to see that TREES were made AFTER Adam was made. You probably have confused Adam's creation by God the Trinity Gen 1:26 Gen 5:1-2 with his formation physically, as ancient men mistakenly thought. This is one of the errors in the traditional religious view which does NOT agree with what is actually written.

Or, the traditional religious view is wrong about there being no inconsistencies in the bible. That's merely one of the inconsistencies, caused by conflating inconsistent traditions into a single narrative. The inconsistencies are merely at the literal level, and the proper interpretation of these verses is not the literal interpretation.

But its nice to see you admit you don't hold to the traditional interpretations, and see you admit the traditional interpretations are inconsistent. But you do take things into a weird direction.

 

[xianghua]

But mutations designed to achieve a target such as a cat from a dog aren't natural. Natural mutations are random, not designed.

yes. but there is a chance that we will get the cat genome by a random event as well (although very small). so basically a cat can evolve from a dog by mutation.

 

[Speedwell]

yes. but there is a chance that we will get the cat genome by a random event as well (although very small). so basically a cat can evolve from a dog by mutation.

It still won't be a cat. A cat-like dog, but a dog just the same.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

yes. but there is a chance that we will get the cat genome by a random event as well (although very small). so basically a cat can evolve from a dog by mutation.

You realize it would never happen from a single mutation? It would take thousands of mutations coordinated together to make that happen.

 

[doubtingmerle]

yes. but there is a chance that we will get the cat genome by a random event as well (although very small). so basically a cat can evolve from a dog by mutation.

To go from dog to cat you would need all the mutations that made the dog go the exact opposite way to unwind the process that made the dog. That would require a long string of exact mutations. You should have no problem understanding that is unlikely.

 

[Aman777]

Not "willingly ignorant." Just indifferent to a shallow and theologically inadequate reading of an ancient Hebrew story.

Can you tell us how many "Heavens" God made in Genesis one?
Can you tell us the diameter of Adam's firmament/Heaven?
Was Adam's Earth, the Earth that THEN WAS, totally destroyed in the flood?

Would you like to compare your half truth to God's Truth? Or do you prefer to remain "willingly ignorant"? God Bless you

 

[Aman777]

Or, the traditional religious view is wrong about there being no inconsistencies in the bible. That's merely one of the inconsistencies, caused by conflating inconsistent traditions into a single narrative. The inconsistencies are merely at the literal level, and the proper interpretation of these verses is not the literal interpretation.

But its nice to see you admit you don't hold to the traditional interpretations, and see you admit the traditional interpretations are inconsistent. But you do take things into a weird direction.

The inconsistencies are in the traditional religious interpretation, which ONLY the people of the last days before Jesus returns, have the "increased intelligence" to understand. Dan 12:4 My view is that we live today in the last days and God is currently pouring out His Spirit of Truth upon the last generation of sinners.

God is revealing the current Scientific discoveries first shown in Genesis chapter one, more than 3k years ago. This fulfills this verse:

Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of My Spirit upon ALL flesh:

The most educated scholars alive today, along with all Atheists, Agnostics and God haters of all kinds, will learn of God's Truth through the discoveries of Science in the last generation. So get ready unbelievers. God's Truth is currently being shown. Want evidence?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The inconsistencies are in the traditional religious interpretation, which ONLY the people of the last days before Jesus returns, have the "increased intelligence" to understand. Dan 12:4 My view is that we live today in the last days and God is currently pouring out His Spirit of Truth upon the last generation of sinners.

God is revealing the current Scientific discoveries first shown in Genesis chapter one, more than 3k years ago. This fulfills this verse:

Act 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of My Spirit upon ALL flesh:

The most educated scholars alive today, along with all Atheists, Agnostics and God haters of all kinds, will learn of God's Truth through the discoveries of Science in the last generation. So get ready unbelievers. God's Truth is currently being shown. Want evidence?

We are indeed learning God's truth through science in this last generation, and it includes common descent of all life, a 13+ billion year aged universe, a 4+ billion year old earth.

 

[Aman777]

We are indeed learning God's truth through science in this last generation, and it includes common descent of all life, a 13+ billion year aged universe, a 4+ billion year old earth.

Amen. It's the only way unbelievers (all flesh) in the last days will accept God's Truth of Genesis. A good example is the scientific discovery made last year that the last universal common ancestor came from Water, in total agreement with what God told us more than 3k years ago.

Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly

It's testable evidence of God since no man of the time could have possibly known this. Amen?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Amen. It's the only way unbelievers (all flesh) in the last days will accept God's Truth of Genesis. A good example is the scientific discovery made last year that the last universal common ancestor came from Water, in total agreement with what God told us more than 3k years ago.

Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly

It's testable evidence of God since no man of the time could have possibly known this. Amen?

What's this "last year" stuff? We have always* known life in the fossil record started in the ocean.

*"always" here refers to the modern scientific point of view since the time of Darwin

 

[Jimmy D]

False accusation, unless you can show us where today's Science accepts God's Holy Word as Truth. IOW, in order believe in today's Science, you MUST reject God's account in Genesis. In fact, God refers to such people as the Scoffers of the last days who are "willingly ignorant" that Adam's entire world was clean dissolved in the flood. That's God's Truth.

Rubbish. I only have to show one Christian who is also a scientist to demonstrate that you're wrong.

We all know about Francis Collins so I'll put his name forward.

 

[doubtingmerle]

What's this "last year" stuff? We have always* known life in the fossil record started in the ocean.

*"always" here refers to the modern scientific point of view since the time of Darwin

I have seen a person here that seems to think that the earth going around the sun is the latest wild scientific proposal. So I guess things that we recognize as established facts are being greeted with astonishment by others as bleeding edge new discoveries.

 

[PsychoSarah]

God defines kinds as temporary or His kinds and eternal kinds created to live forever (Their kinds) in Heaven. The invisible Spirit (Trinity) speaks and Lord God/Jesus does the actual forming or shaping physically what Science refers to as common ancestors. The best example is Adam, made by Lord God on the 3rd Day Gen 2:4-7 and Adam's "creation in God's Image" by God (Trinity) on the present 6th Day/Age. Gen 5:1-2

Kinds is not a classification system. What is important to know is that His kinds and Their kinds can produce children with each other. Gen 6:4 It's the way ALL Humans (descendants of Adam) were produced on our planet. God has now produced some 7 Billion living Humans to populate Heaven in just 11k years since Noah arrived. Amen?

That would make "kind" inconsistent, because there aren't clear barriers between groups of organisms against breeding. Species A and B can breed, species B and C can breed, but species A and C cannot breed is a common observation in nature and causes just as much of a problem for "kinds" as it does for the species labels themselves.