The Barbarian
Crabby Old White Guy
- Apr 3, 2003
- 26,051
- 11,384
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Upvote
0
The concept of a "designer" (which the ID people say "might be a space alien") is opposed to the concept of an omniscient Creator. Being omniscient, He would have no need for "design", which is something limited creatures must do.
God never has to figure anything out.
Hardly. It's the difference between an omnipotent Creator, and a mere "designer."
Since YE creationism is no older than the 20th century, He would have to be a theistic evolutionist. How could it be otherwise? He made it that way, after all.
There’s no way to believe the Bible and be a theistic evolutionist - the two are diametrically opposed.
Adam can not be the product of evolution. He was alone, without even a woman around, until God cloned Eve from Adams rib cells.
And death did not exist until the fall of Adam and Eve, yet evolution is based on death, per Darwin:
In the conclusion of The Origin of Species, Darwin stated, “Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.
Evolution requires death of all the precursor animals that gradually evolved into humans.
Adams origin was not from Darwinian gradualism - thus one can be a theistic evolutionist, but not a bible believing evolutionist.
No, that's wrong. The Neanderthal genome has been sequenced, and they are an entirely different sub-species of human; some geneticists even think they qualify as a separate species.
Neanderthals: species or subspecies? | COMPASS
To summarize, present-day humans outside of Africa show traces of Neanderthal DNA, but there are no Neanderthal mtDNA or Neanderthal Y chromosomes in modern human populations. The current consensus among anthropologists is that Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens are indeed separate species, although that might change with further research and with the discovery of more Neanderthal samples.
Neanderthal DNA: How different were they from humans? | Real Archaeology
I tend to think they are a subspecies of H. sapiens, mainly because early Neanderthals looked more like us than later ones. But that's not a sure thing. It looks as though most geneticists think the evidence shows them to be a separate species.
Wrong. They were genetically quite different than anatomically modern humans.
No. Not only is that assumption not in scripture, there were whales romping around in the seas, according to God. So much, much bigger bodies of water. (edit: actually, it doesn't say they were romping, but they obviously were doing well)
An orca (a medium-sized cetacean) needs about a quarter-million kcal of food per day, meaning that a huge area of ocean is needed for every whale to provide that kind of food.
No, it actually doesn't say that. That's man's alteration of God's word.
The Earth isn't 71% water. Moreover, without a hydrologic cycle, there would be no rivers. Basic physics.
When you say that Eve was “cloned” from Adam, you are introducing modern concepts into an ancient story. I find that creationists are constantly doing just that, inserting modern concepts into sentences from ancient manuscripts. You can only come up with an arbitrary interpretation doing this. Apparently your view is that Adam and Eve were identical twins of different genders.
Jesus taught Adam and Eve literally, and no text says Genesis is allegorical that I’ve ever seen.
No form of death existed before the fall, neither spiritual or physical.
Death did not exist, and no animals were carnivores before the fall. On the new earth, all things will be restored to Edenic conditions, and there will again be no death and animals like lions will be herbivores again, per the prophet Isaiah.
One can’t escape the fact Adam has a sudden appearance from dirt, and was alone until God cloned Eve from Adams rib cells, eliminating any possibility that he arrived as a product of evolutionary gradualism.
In fact, Jesus never referred to the Bible as a literal history. He often taught allegories and parables as ways of teaching. So it's not surprising that He taught those from the Bible.
The text in Genesis 1, for example, makes it clear that it's not literal. Referring to mornings and evenings before there was a sun to have them, makes that clear.
All old information and discredited claims.
Not basic physics, since the pre flood earth was watered solely from underground sources, and the rivers and small seas were part of that process - once again, Genesis says it didn’t rain on the pre flood earth,
In 2006, news was released that scientists had found Neanderthal DNA to be as much as 99.9% identical to modern humans.
There’s no way to believe the Bible and be a theistic evolutionist - the two are diametrically opposed.
Adam can not be the product of evolution. He was alone, without even a woman around, until God cloned Eve from Adams rib cells.
And death did not exist until the fall of Adam and Eve, yet evolution is based on death, per Darwin:
In the conclusion of The Origin of Species, Darwin stated, “Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows.
Evolution requires death of all the precursor animals that gradually evolved into humans.
Adams origin was not from Darwinian gradualism - thus one can be a theistic evolutionist, but not a bible believing evolutionist.
Jesus taught Adam and Eve literally, and no text says Genesis is allegorical that I’ve ever seen.
No form of death existed before the fall, neither spiritual or physical.
Death did not exist, and no animals were carnivores before the fall. On the new earth, all things will be restored to Edenic conditions, and there will again be no death and animals like lions will be herbivores again, per the prophet Isaiah.
One can’t escape the fact Adam has a sudden appearance from dirt, and was alone until God cloned Eve from Adams rib cells, eliminating any possibility that he arrived as a product of evolutionary gradualism.
I’m not going to spend a lot of time on the facts that now show they were completely human, but will just post one of the facts about this:
Evolutionists claim a 1997 study Neanderthal mtDNA shows they were not human. This claim is based on the degree of differences in Neanderthal and living human mtDNA. However, as is often the case, nothing destroys a good Evolutionary argument like the original paper. The bases for the claim is a comparison with Neanderthal mtNA positions 16,024 to 16,383 which is just 360 nucleotides.
In 2006, news was released that scientists had found Neanderthal DNA to be as much as 99.9% identical to modern humans.[5] However, this does more than shorten the gap between Neanderthals and humans, since it is recognized by the mainstream scientific community that any two humans on earth have genes that are 99.9% identical to each other.[6] Such recognition of modern genetic divergence also serves to acknowledge Neanderthals as fully human genetically.
The claims of huge anatomical differences also have not held up.
Genesis states that it did not rain before the flood, but the fountains of the deep watered the earth - there was not enough water above ground at that time to have the hydrologic cycle.
To flood the earth the fountains of the deep were opened up and spewed gigantic fountains of high pressure water high into the air all over the world, which fell to earth as rain.
Post flood the earth is 71% covered with water, sufficient to have significant evaporation into the atmosphere for today’s hydrological cycle to occur.
Moses didn’t invent the Genesis creation account - God spent 40 days with Moses on Mount Sinai and gave it to him.
For many decades the standard cosmological model was the steady state model, aka the uniformitarian model, that said the universe always existed, yet all along the Genesis account stated that the universe had a sudden beginning in a point in time, long before science caught up with that fact with the Big Bang theory and proved Genesis right.
Long before astronomy and telescopes existed, the Bible knew that the earth floats in space, at a time when it was thought the earth was supported on the back of Atlas or on an elephants back.
Not basic physics, since the pre flood earth was watered solely from underground sources, and the rivers and small seas were part of that process - once again, Genesis says it didn’t rain on the pre flood earth, which explains why there was no such thing as a rainbow until after the flood,
Scientists are human and humans lie. Science is desperate to hold onto the godless myth of evolution. I will give just one example of how science lies. Fusion power is the subject of much research and correspondingly vast budgets. Researchers have managed to get to create a reaction which produces 0.7 times the energy used to create the reaction. So they say. This is simply not true. The figures are deceptive because they ignore the power required to generate the power to create fusion. One technique is lasers. Lasers require power to function, and a huge amount to produce enough for fusion research. The researchers quote the power of the laser, not the total power including that to make the laser work. There is also no mention of the power losses that will occur when converting heat from fusion to usable energy. So no, fusion power is not even remotely close to practical applications. But funding is at stake, so such minor details are glossed over.Dtaylor: “It is science that is lying about God's creation not The Bible.”
Science has no motive to lie. Scientists have no motive to lie.
Perhaps you misunderstand the Bible.
no where does the bible say the seas was formed from underground sources just the opposite is said. the water was part of the upper water then divided the remaining below was called seas.
The upper water was a canopy of thin crystals of ice surrounding earth like a Dyson sphere, that made the whole earth climate a temperate paradise.
Chad Kincham: “To flood the earth the fountains of the deep were opened up and spewed gigantic fountains of high pressure water high into the air all over the world, which fell to earth as rain.”
Where are these “fountains of the deep”? Has anyone found them? Have creationists ever looked for them? The answer is that no one has found them. I’m not aware that anyone has ever looked for them, but geologists would have found them if they existed. Creationists keep demanding more evidence from non-creationists but they have none to offer themselves.
In your image of “gigantic fountains of high pressure water high into the air” you are adding to scripture, which does not give us this picture.
So you’re unaware that there are vast networks of caverns and caves worldwide?
Some are 8,000 feet deep.
They’re hiding in plain sight.
But there’s no signs posted on them saying FOUNTAINS OF THE DEEP, so that’s probably unacceptable evidence for you.
Just as there aren’t signs on the strata found worldwide that say LAYERS OF ROCK SORTED IN MOVING WATER BY SIZE AND DENSITY, so that geology will recognize evidence hiding in plain sight of the great flood that occurred due to the underground reservoirs being opened up.