Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it...
What about the seventh day, Rex Lex? Explain to me why it does not have an evening and a morning.
I understand very well how adaptation works -- I have a degree in palaeontology. And it doesn't work the way you say it does. That's why I'm asking you to provide some citations in support of your idea about how adaptation works. So far, it sounds like you're just making stuff up.No, I didn't make up the scenario, but neither did I say it was from a paper. So, you are stating that you don't understand how adaptation works and you need a paper to spell it out?
That's what I meant by "your kidding."
I'm sure there are papers describing adaptational changes, but I don't really think you need me to find you one.
Where did God refer to the days of Genesis as historical?Not even when God Himself quoted it as factual history? Be careful where that leads you, unless you are calling God a liar.
It looks like you're responding to the quote in my tag line. It's from YEC Dr. Todd Wood. Here's the rest of the quote:Actually, there isn't. There is, however, gobs and gobs of assumptions taught to us AS codified facts of evolution, but they are unwarranted and, therefore, illegitimate. They are ONLY unverifiable assumptions, stacked upon unverifiable, speculations...stacked upon more unverifiable hypotheses. Nothing factual about them.
Because whenever these two words are used for morning and evening, they always mean exactly that...morning and evening.
Because the word "ereb" for evening, meaning "dusk", also means in Hebrew prose as chaos. The word "boker" for morning, meaning "day break" or "the end of night," also Hebrew prose for "order."
What exactly do you mean by "natural selection favours?" and how is that not "mystical" to assign cognative words to a mindless process?
What about the seventh day, Rex Lex? Explain to me why it does not have an evening and a morning.
But I've just shown you how such a thing can exist: the Twelve Days of Christmas are literal but not actual. For that matter, the characters of Jesus' parables are literal but not actual.
When we read the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, for example, we interpret Lazarus as being a literal beggar with sores who was licked by dogs. It is not the case that Lazarus stood for, say, the sorry state of the oppressed Jewish people, for example. But just because we believe that Lazarus of the story is literally a beggar, instead of a nation, does not mean that we believe that there was anactual Lazarus the beggar whose sores were licked by dogs. (But then that does not mean that there wasn't an actual Lazarus, the cousin of Mary and Martha, who died and was resuscitated by Jesus. See how complicated these things can get?)
Very good. Did you know that many TEs here believe that Adam was a real, historical figure? Moreover, did you know that they also believe that Jesus was descended from him?
Yeah, well why would God Almighty mislead countless millions of people for over 2,000 years to believe that their sins could be cleansed through the blood of bulls and goats?
And why would God Almighty mislead countless millions of people for over 1,600 years to believe that your sins could be cleared by priests waving receipts?
The simple fact of the matter is that God has seen fit for the human race to not receive the full package of all possible truth about life and the universe at once. There are always people who are "deceived" because they haven't got everything yet, like the disciples of John's baptism in Ephesus in Acts 19. Is that God's fault? We are the ones who rejected perfect communion with the God of all knowledge. Darwin's theory is merely one possible scientific theory about life.
Because the word "ereb" for evening, meaning "dusk", also means in Hebrew prose as chaos. The word "boker" for morning, meaning "day break" or "the end of night," also Hebrew prose for "order."
Each of the six days gradually created order out of chaos, which is why the wording is always "there was evening and there was morning" and not "there was morning and there was evening," the exact opposite of what God was doing. There is not evening or morning on the seventh day because God had finished creating order out of the chaos of Him first commanding matter into existence.
Here's one for you...where did water come from? No where is Genesis is God ever mentioned as creating water...it just popped up out of no where. Creation scientists have verified (I spoke to the lead scientist myself at the culmination of a series of experiments) that when you suck matter out of a confined space, and then suddenly bombard that space with matter, condensation develops. When God spoke matter into existence ("Let there be light." and we all know that the base nature of matter is light energy), water formed throughout the cosmos as a direct result of the sudden bombardment of matter.
That is so cool!!!
Cheers!
You might want to tone down the vitriol, Rex Lex. Belittling peoples' Christianity on these forums is against the rules.
Saying that one cannot be a good Christian and accept evolution, for one.What vitriol?
I think I will avoid you.
How is it unbiblical? The Flood doesn't strike me as particularly orderly, nor does the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Isaiah 45:7 also tells us that God creates calamity.Thanks, friend, but you need to correct your statement that God 'created order out of chaos' for that is an unbiblical doctrine.
Exactly what, in your mind, does "differential reproductive success" mean?
You misunderstand what I said. I didn't say that genes came about as a response to environmental cues, I said that their expression comes about in response to environmental cues.
No, what I described is the difference between two entirely different mechanisms of genetic change, one that is based upon random chance accidents and one that is based upon non-random chance genetic change due to environmental cues - which have been verified now for over 30 years.
.
The presence of pre-existing variational genes is the exact same thing as genetic change due to environmental cues...it is non-random because those changes are mediated by the organism's genome in direct response to those cues..
Variational alleles to not occur randomly with respect to their affects on the organism, they are already present within the genome en trans, kept until they are cued into expression...they have been there since God put them there the day they were created.
Then you didn't understand what I said, or you didn't understand what the papers state. They both support what I said they do.
And I didn't say that they were. Genes are not altered by their environment, their expression is either turned "on" or "off" by the cues they receive from their environment.
You aren't making much sense here. Whether or not the direct offspring's phenotype is the same as the parent, the exact compliment of the genotype remains the same. Expression does not change that, and the parent's grandchildren, if raised in the same environment as they were, will inherit their phenotype. So phenotypes are heritable.
No, evolutionary change states that a single celled organism can, over eons of time, give way to an elephant.
What you describe here is genetic inheritance.
There is no such thing as "microevolution" except in the mind of the evolutionist. This is another word game played to give "macroevolution" the feel and smell of reality.
Agreed, the variation is pre-existent, environmental cues do not create new alleles, but that's not what I said. I said that environmental cues signal into expression variational alleles that have been stored within the genome unexpressed until they are needed.
What exactly do you mean by "natural selection favours?" and how is that not "mystical" to assign cognative words to a mindless process?
Thanks for the lolz! Just what my monday morning needed!Good Christians do not believe in evolution nor in the idea that the world is millions or still less billions of yrs old. They believe God's Word.
Good Christians do not believe in evolution nor in the idea that the world is millions or still less billions of yrs old. They believe God's Word.
But even so, you avoided the heavier issue: why would God mislead people into believing a lie for over 3,000 yrs (i.e. from the time of Moses 1,440 B.C. to 1859 A.D.).
Evolution is a damnable lie. It has neither biblical support nor scientific support.
Exactly what, in your mind, does "differential reproductive success" mean?
Variational alleles to not occur randomly with respect to their affects on the organism, they are already present within the genome en trans, kept until they are cued into expression...they have been there since God put them there the day they were created.
Genes are not altered by their environment, their expression is either turned "on" or "off" by the cues they receive from their environment.
Whether or not the direct offspring's phenotype is the same as the parent, the exact compliment of the genotype remains the same.
No, evolutionary change states that a single celled organism can, over eons of time, give way to an elephant.
There is no such thing as "microevolution" except in the mind of the evolutionist. This is another word game played to give "macroevolution" the feel and smell of reality.
What exactly do you mean by "natural selection favours?" and how is that not "mystical" to assign cognative words to a mindless process?
How did you decide this about "good" Christians? Do you realize that most Christians accept evolution? That those that do/have accepted evolution include some of the most notable Christians in the last 150 years?
BTW, according to the Bible, what is the "Word"?
God didn't mislead. The people of the time knew that Genesis 1 was not to be taken literally. They had the Enuma Elish and realized that Genesis 1 is structured to destroy the Babylonian gods. It succeeded very well at that task. So well that we today are no longer familiar with the Enuma Elish and we aren't reading the text correctly.
God didn't mislead people. People mislead themselves. But at that Christians were correcting themselves. See the first quote in my signature. Christians realized that they needed to change their interpretation when faced with evidence from God in His Creation. The quote was in response to finding out the earth is very old and there was no world-wide flood.
Christians also abandoned creationism for evolution because evolution rescues God from problems that creationism makes for Him. Christians were easy to persuade that God created by evolution.
But then came along Fundamentalists in 1900-1915 who elevated scripture above God. They were more concerned with "His Word" than with God. And they mislead themselves and others.
Oooh. You should be more careful about committing false witness. If evolution is a lie, then it means God lied to us. I refuse to accept God as a liar. What's more, there is immense scientific support. Go to PubMed and enter "evolution" as your search term. Over 300,000 articles with scientific support for evolution.
What else did they believe the Bible taught?You are deceived. The Christian world did not believe in evolution or the so-called long ages of time before the 1800's. Calvin, Luther, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, etc. all believed in the six day creation as taught in Genesis and Exodus.
You are deceived. The Christian world did not believe in evolution or the so-called long ages of time before the 1800's. Calvin, Luther, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, etc. all believed in the six day creation as taught in Genesis and Exodus.
"...in six days the Lord God created the heavens and the earth.". It was on that basis and the seventh day Sabbath of the Lord that the literal, 24 hr Sabbath of the Hebrews was established.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?