Is God a liar?

[Smidlee]

False, since the people of the last days, with the increased knowledge available to them WILL understand. This is because the discoveries of Science, in the last days, AGREE in every way with what God told us more than 3k years ago in Genesis. No man of the time could have possibly known the scientific Truths shown in Genesis. Dan 12:4 Jesus tells us the Holy Spirit will lead us into ALL Truth. Jhn 16:13

I'm pretty sure Daniel is referring to "knowledge of the scriptures" and not science since he asked God to explain his own prophecy as you pointed out in Daniel 12:4.
The Bible doesn't deal with science as it's limited to human reasoning but it deals with truth that is not based on human reasoning.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

If no individual in the population evolves - there is no possibility of evolution ever taking place. . . .

A meaningless objection. We observe individuals change all the time.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Yeap. And the heavens DO NOT declare the principle of continuity. Prove to me the heaven declare this heresy to be true. This religious belief doesn't come from scripture but pagans who worship the sun, moon and stars.

We observe galaxies as they were billions of years ago and they are like our own galaxy right now. Thus the principle of continuity is observed.

 

[Smidlee]

We observe galaxies as they were billions of years ago and they are like our own galaxy right now. Thus the principle of continuity is observed.

Nonsense. You assume all those galaxies are the result of the principle of continuity. There is no reason to believe this is true. .
It's exactly as Isaac Newton put it, gravity explains how our solar system operates but not it's origins.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Nonsense. You assume all those galaxies are the result of the principle of continuity. There is no reason to believe this is true. .
It's exactly as Isaac Newton put it, gravity explains how our solar system operates but not it's origins.

Its not nonsense to admit it looks as if the principle of continuity is true. Additionally, there are many other indicators of the constancy of physical law, such as relics of ancient life that lived as we live, consistent layers laid down in ice cores and lake bottoms, consistent radioactive decay observations and remnants . . . .

Your arbitrary rejection of all this evidence does not appear to be logical.

 

[BobRyan]

A meaningless objection. We observe individuals change all the time.

I was responding to the claim by another poster that individuals don't change only populations do. So is your post "backhanded agreement"???

 

[BobRyan]

False, since the people of the last days, with the increased knowledge available to them WILL understand. This is because the discoveries of Science, in the last days, AGREE in every way with what God told us more than 3k years ago in Genesis. No man of the time could have possibly known the scientific Truths shown in Genesis. Dan 12:4 Jesus tells us the Holy Spirit will lead us into ALL Truth. Jhn 16:13

Agreed. Knowledge increases and modes of travel explode with technology "many shall run to and fro" -- in Job 1 and 2 Satan says he comes from Earth - from walking to and fro - Even our technology for travel today does not remotely approach Satan's ability in that regard.

 

[BobRyan]

Modern science places constraints upon itself. It limits itself to materialistic explanations. That does not mean that materialism is all that a scientist thinks that there is, but only that a scientist agrees to doing science within a set of established parameters.

Specifically because its means of investigation are limited to materialism. Yet even so - we do not claim that every computer buried in the sand "created itself". Materialism or not - we know when that cannot happen or be reproduced as if a natural event caused it.

So then does it "appear to us" that a "rock will turn into a rabbit over time..."?

No!

Does it "appear to us" that you can take a chemistry set and "produce a thought" with it?

No!

 

[Aman777]

I'm pretty sure Daniel is referring to "knowledge of the scriptures" and not science since he asked God to explain his own prophecy as you pointed out in Daniel 12:4.
The Bible doesn't deal with science as it's limited to human reasoning but it deals with truth that is not based on human reasoning.

Amen...but the Holy Spirit MUST tell the scientific and historic Truth, which will be discovered in the last days, and He did. The Bible is NOT a Science Book BUT it is True to Science in every way. Can you tell us How you think God will pour out His Spirit, Act 2:17 which is the Spirit of Truth, upon ALL flesh, in the last days? There are Billions of evolutionists, scoffers and phony religionists, alive today, and they won't listen to anything except the provable Truth.

 

[SolomonVII]

Specifically because its means of investigation are limited to materialism. Yet even so - we do not claim that every computer buried in the sand "created itself". Materialism or not - we know when that cannot happen or be reproduced as if a natural event caused it.

So then does it "appear to us" that a "rock will turn into a rabbit over time..."?

No!

Does it "appear to us" that you can take a chemistry set and "produce a thought" with it?

No!

Being a Christian to me means honoring the truth, wherever you may find it and whatever it may be. Jesus says he is the truth, and to be Christians means that we are to devote ourselves to truth.
The evolutionary natural selection as a blind, impersonal impetus for effective and positive adaptation to the environment over time is compelling. For anyone who is a servant to the truth, this is where the best evidence lies.

As an explanation for everything, natural selection leaves huge gaps in our understanding of how we and the world came to be. That is the hubris on behalf of materialistic naturalism to insist that natural selection is sufficient to explain life in our world today.
Of course every debate where there is a hardening of position has two sides making partisan points against each other.

It is hubris to aver that natural selection explains everything. It is also hubris to aver that natural selection explains nothing.

When the debate gets drawn along partisan lines, truth is the first victim.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
Specifically because its means of investigation are limited to materialism. Yet even so - we do not claim that every computer buried in the sand "created itself". Materialism or not - we know when that cannot happen or be reproduced as if a natural event caused it.

So then does it "appear to us" that a "rock will turn into a rabbit over time..."?
No!

Does it "appear to us" that you can take a chemistry set and "produce a thought" with it?
No!

Being a Christian to me means honoring the truth, wherever you may find it and whatever it may be. Jesus says he is the truth, and to be Christians means that we are to devote ourselves to truth.

I agree. The evolutionary natural selection as a blind, impersonal impetus for effective and positive adaptation to the environment over time is not compelling at all for getting rocks to turn into rabbits over time or even for bacteria to turn into rabbits over time. For anyone who is a servant to the truth, this is where commons sense and observations in nature are seen to confirm the Word of God in scripture.

"For in SIX DAYS the Lord created the heavens and the Earth the seas and all that is in them" Ex 20:11 -- LEGAL code perfectly summarizing the Genesis 1:2-2:3 origins event.

Irrefutable.

Obviously natural selection does not "explain everything" - but it can explain some levels of speciation within an already existing gene pool.

When the debate must ignore observations in nature that refute blind faith in evolutionism - truth is the first victim.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I was responding to the claim by another poster that individuals don't change only populations do. So is your post "backhanded agreement"???

Well individuals change . . . . but we don't call that evolution. Evolution is when the genetics of a species change. So we need to be careful how we use the words. Biological evolution isn't about personal evolution.

 

[BobRyan]

Well individuals change . . . . but we don't call that evolution.

Indeed.

Evolution is when the genetics of a species change.

Indeed acquiring brand new genes - demonstrating new function in phenotype. For example the prokaryote bacteria - "acquiring" a cell wall around the nucleus on its way to becoming an Amoeba (over time of course possibly 100's of generations). Something that never happened - but much imagined "new feature" all the same in blind faith evolutionism.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Indeed.



Indeed acquiring brand new genes - demonstrating new function in phenotype. For example the prokaryote bacteria - "acquiring" a cell wall around the nucleus on its way to becoming an Amoeba (over time of course possibly 100's of generations). Something that never happened - but much imagined "new feature" all the same in blind faith evolutionism.

Well, as long as we talk about it using the words in the same way we can then advance on to disagreeing as to whether it happened or not.

 

[BobRyan]

Well individuals change . . . . but we don't call that evolution.

Indeed.

Evolution is when the genetics of a species change.

Indeed acquiring brand new genes - demonstrating new function in phenotype. For example the prokaryote bacteria - "acquiring" a cell wall around the nucleus on its way to becoming an Amoeba (over time of course possibly 100's of generations). Something that never happened - but much imagined "new feature" all the same in blind faith evolutionism.

Well, as long as we talk about it using the words in the same way we can then advance on to disagreeing as to whether it happened or not.

In the example I give above - we have 50,000 generations of "observations in nature" proving that it does not happen.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Indeed.



Indeed acquiring brand new genes - demonstrating new function in phenotype. For example the prokaryote bacteria - "acquiring" a cell wall around the nucleus on its way to becoming an Amoeba (over time of course possibly 100's of generations). Something that never happened - but much imagined "new feature" all the same in blind faith evolutionism.



In the example I give above - we have 50,000 generations of "observations in nature" proving that it does not happen.

Or perhaps they only illustrate you are discussing a kind of mutation that is so rare it occurs somewhat less frequently than that.

 

[Aman777]

Being a Christian to me means honoring the truth, wherever you may find it and whatever it may be. Jesus says he is the truth, and to be Christians means that we are to devote ourselves to truth.
The evolutionary natural selection as a blind, impersonal impetus for effective and positive adaptation to the environment over time is compelling. For anyone who is a servant to the truth, this is where the best evidence lies.

Evolutionists made one enormous mistake. They forgot about the flood which totally destroyed Adam's world. My thoughts are in black.

2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, (unbelievers) walking after their own lusts, 2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of His (Jesus) coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world (Greek-Kosmos) that THEN WAS, being overflowed with water, perished: (Greek-destroyed, totally, utterly)

Adam's entire world/heaven was totally destroyed, clean dissolved Isa 24:19 in the waters of the flood. Notice that this verse speaks of the world which THEN WAS. Evolutionists forgot about the flood, leaving their false Theory incomplete, since it is willingly ignorant of Humanity's true origins. This means that someone has told the Evolutionists God's Truth, in the last days, but they will not accept it. Do you?

2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, WHICH ARE NOW, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Just in case someone reads this and doesn't understand, God is speaking of another world/heaven, the FIRST Heaven, the world of Adam, the home of Humanity, which the evolutionists/scoffers of the last days forgot all about. They are willingly ignorant because it totally destroys their false assumptions of our true beginnings. Someone should tell them so that they can be "willingly ignorant" instead of just plain ole ignorant. Amen?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Evolutionists made one enormous mistake. They forgot about the flood which totally destroyed Adam's world. My thoughts are in black.
has told the Evolutionists God's Truth, in the last days, but they will not accept it. Do you?

Now now, just because those who accept the results of investigating reality deny that there was a flood over the whole globe does NOT mean they forgot about it. They merely deny its global extent.

 

[Aman777]

Now now, just because those who accept the results of investigating reality deny that there was a flood over the whole globe does NOT mean they forgot about it. They merely deny its global extent.

Another good example of ancient theology, since the flood story shows that the Ark appeared in Lake Van, Turkey in the mountains of Ararat. History agrees and shows that it happened 11k years ago and Human (descendants of Adam) civilization on planet Earth can be traced to its arrival. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE

The windows on top of the firmament were opened and it rained for 40 days and nights and the hollow firmament began to sink. The Ark left the ground on the 40th day after the flood began. Gen 7:17 On the 150th day, the Ark was above the highest mountains on Adam's flat Earth. Gen 7:20 AND On the SAME 150th day after the flood began, the Ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. Gen 8:4

IOW, The firmament sank in the Lake leaving the covered Ark in our world. This meant that Adam's small world was "clean dissolved" Isaiah 24:19 in the flood AND the only ones saved were Noah's family. Noah's grandsons, like Cain, had NO other Humans to marry. They married and had children Gen 10:10 with the prehistoric people who were already here when the Ark arrived. That's God's literal Truth, Scripturally. That's how God hid His Truth in the future discoveries of Science, which are just now being announced. I believe the scientific discovery of Adam's firmament is imminent. God Bless you

 

[BobRyan]

Well individuals change . . . . but we don't call that evolution.

Indeed.

Evolution is when the genetics of a species change.

Indeed acquiring brand new genes - demonstrating new function in phenotype. For example the prokaryote bacteria - "acquiring" a cell wall around the nucleus on its way to becoming an Amoeba (over time of course possibly 100's of generations). Something that never happened - but much imagined "new feature" all the same in blind faith evolutionism.

Well, as long as we talk about it using the words in the same way we can then advance on to disagreeing as to whether it happened or not.

In the example I give above - we have 50,000 generations of "observations in nature" proving that it does not happen.

Or perhaps they only illustrate you are discussing a kind of mutation that is so rare it occurs somewhat less frequently than that.

Certainly it is true that the "improbable nay in fact impossible" proposed changes in the many-storied scheme of evolutionism are "infrequent" and the more we have "observations in nature" available (such as the 50,000 generations worth" the more it is "confirmed" that by faith alone evolutionism - is faith in things that don't actually happen in nature.

Just because those who believe in investigating reality find evolutionism does not happen - does not mean they are evil.

For example human evolution is imagined to have happened in less than 1/10th of the 50,000 generation experiment "observed in nature" in the case of bacteria.

What is more - bacteria are 'designed' to genetically adapt to their environment wearing their DNA literally "on their sleeves" as compared to humans. So the uber-adabtable organism is "observed" not to evolve up the ladder - over 50,000 generations yet it is still to be 'much imagined' that humans, horses and rabbits would not be so slow to adapt and evolve as their much more adaptive bacteria competitor.