Where are the YECs?

[Buho]

Over the past half-year, I've been opening topics in "Open to All Members Section > Discussion & Debate > Creation & Evolution" that attempt to extend well beyond the simple PRATTs and AIG articles. Usually typical there are a few pages of insipid peanut-gallery backbiting of evolutionists and creationists, and then as I keep prodding for the truth of the underlying, unbiased science, the creationist activity drops off and I'm left to battle atheists and agnostics (who appear to be professionals in science fields; I am a pro in programming & information systems). The theistic evolutionists even tend to disappear so I'm left to defend God Himself, solo, without assistance, not to mention the science from a creation perspective.

I have to purposes for writing this post. One is to present an honest question to the creationists: Why do you disappear when presented with real science? Two, I'm making a feeble attempt to rally creationist support in my threads. I recognize the weakness of one man's voice, how one mind can make horrendous mistakes, especially when backed into a corner. This is precisely what is happening in my latest thread. I'm asking for some support to the science I've presented, or if my science is wrong, at least support in defense of God, whom I've put all my faith in.

Some threads I've started and put considerable research into:

Taxonomy - Historical Order of Evolution?
Ammonites - ancient critters seem to pop into existance
DNA and Gitt information theory
Zircon helium diffusion gives age of 6000 years

Now, I realize that I do spend most of my time on my own threads and not helping other YECs in their threads. I spent huge amounts of time outside the forum researching and can only focus on one topic at a time. At the risk of sounding selfish, I ask that YECs read my threads and post if you have anything intelligent to offer, and I encourage you all to research these topics further yourselves if the topics strikes your curiosity. If you cannot contribute in a meaningful mannor (eg. if you don't have science or appologetics to offer), please abstain from posting.

As of right now, I'm backed into a corner on the last two threads.

In a few weeks I plan on starting a new thread that highlights the phenominal lack of incrimental "information-adding" mutations in genetic experiments that are required for a critters-to-man evolution to take place. I need to find supporting resources first, though. If you see a related post in the C&E forum in the coming weeks, please contribute!

Grace and peace to you all.

 

[vossler]

Over the past half-year, I've been opening topics in "Open to All Members Section > Discussion & Debate > Creation & Evolution" that attempt to extend well beyond the simple PRATTs and AIG articles. Usually typical there are a few pages of insipid peanut-gallery backbiting of evolutionists and creationists, and then as I keep prodding for the truth of the underlying, unbiased science, the creationist activity drops off and I'm left to battle atheists and agnostics (who appear to be professionals in science fields; I am a pro in programming & information systems). The theistic evolutionists even tend to disappear so I'm left to defend God Himself, solo, without assistance, not to mention the science from a creation perspective.

I'm sorry you've had to go it alone. Unfortunately, I'm not of much help, I know little to nothing about science. I normally don't visit C & E for the very reasons you just mentioned, but recently, probably more due to boredom than anything else, I've given it some time. Like you, I don't find too many YECs there and if they are they're arguing points I'm not in a position to contribute to.

Now, I've got a question for you. Why post using science as your main weapon when your not a scientist? Why not use the Word of God, which is sharper than any two-edged sword?

 

[SBG]

I do not support the bickering, back-stabbing, and hatred that is expressed so often in those open forums. I do not believe that participating in them when they are filled with this. It only adds to the problem that we shouldn't be adding to as Christians.

Everyone has their beliefs, even scientists. They are allowed to have their beliefs. We preach Jesus Christ crucified and risen not taxonomy or the string theory. The latter are man made thoughts and teachings. The former is God's teaching.

We don't spread the Gospel by speaking science; we spread it by teaching Jesus Christ crucified and risen.

I would ask why are you insistent on others accepting your view point of science instead of teaching them about Jesus Christ?

 

[Buho]

Well, I think my approach over the last half-year has been to utilize the extreme polarities in C&E to test the metal of science itself. If there's any crack at all to the science presented, one of the polarities will find it.

Yes, the backbiting is nasty, but I try to moderate my own threads and they mostly behave.

I became a Christian about 1.5 years ago. At the time I was an evolutionist and scoffed at the creationists. But when I looked at the science more carefully, I saw I can actually put my full faith in the entirety of the Bible. I became a creationist about a year ago. I believe this full-faith has accelerated my biblical studies. For the past year, I've been sucking in as much science as I can get my hands on. It's absolutely fabulous to re-learn the world I live in from a biblical perspective! I can't get enough of it!

So, I'm not so much subjecting others to my beliefs, but using their nonbelief to evaluate the worth of the science.

Now, I've got a question for you. Why post using science as your main weapon when your not a scientist? Why not use the Word of God, which is sharper than any two-edged sword?

I find it totally facinating to see God working in His creation. Totally valid question. I used to use C&E as a place for evangelizing. I'd post some science and conclude with scripture in the hopes that silent fence-sitters would catch my posts. More likely, though, I'm using C&E to hone my own knowledge so I can talk to people in person on these topics. And don't get me wrong, I'm going through equally-difficult theological studies to be able to wield that double-edged sword. But why use science? It's one thing nonbelievers respect. If God is working on them, showing them evidence of God is tremendous. For TEs, I am honestly concerned about their lack of faith in the inerrancy of God's word, and how it can undermine the very foundations of their relationship with God. For me, since finding God's creation account upheld in the very world I live in has incalculably strengthened my studies in his word and allowed me to grow extremely fast in my theological scholarship. (I hope this doesn't sound boastful.)

At the same time, I have to comment on your philosophy, vossler. I'm rather aggrivated that science is such a weak area with Christians in general. I have a Bachelor of Science in Information Systems, I started out in Computer Science, and took Physics and Astronomy in college. I'm planning on returning to get a Masters in Information Science and Theory. Is science best left for those who are "too logical" to believe in God? Do Christians find it more worthwhile to spend time in God's word and praising God than to advance their skills in science? (Or do Christians find it more worthwhile to replace science with God and spend the rest of their free time in other trivial non-God things?) These are rhetorical questions. Ultimately, yes, a heavy focus on creation science is unhealthy if it takes away from communion with God and working for God, just as unhealthy as too much TV-watching, video games, or non-God-profitable socializing.

Yes, I think science-savvy atheistic evolutionists might be as savvy as they are because they spend so much time in research, whereas Christians find themselves casting aside worldly things in persuit of God Himself. Perhaps that is all I see.

Eh, I'm starting to ramble. Thanks for your replies.

 

[mark kennedy]

Over the past half-year, I've been opening topics in "Open to All Members Section > Discussion & Debate > Creation & Evolution" that attempt to extend well beyond the simple PRATTs and AIG articles. Usually typical there are a few pages of insipid peanut-gallery backbiting of evolutionists and creationists, and then as I keep prodding for the truth of the underlying, unbiased science, the creationist activity drops off and I'm left to battle atheists and agnostics (who appear to be professionals in science fields; I am a pro in programming & information systems). The theistic evolutionists even tend to disappear so I'm left to defend God Himself, solo, without assistance, not to mention the science from a creation perspective.

I have spent close to two years on there trying to do the same thing. I never really got much out of AIG and I did most of my research for my points on Genetics. I have a couple of Quiet Post Thread submissions and I have made thousands of posts. I have not had a chance to look over your threads but I really don't think I'm interested in contributing to them. Science has very little to do with those arguments there and I have seen dozens of creationists run off simply because their are not welcome there. I understand that you are trying to defend God's work in creation alone, I've been there, it's not easy taking on half a dozen evolutionary zealots. I'll be happy to discuss things with you here but I think the Creation/evolution debate forum is beyond repair.

I have to purposes for writing this post. One is to present an honest question to the creationists: Why do you disappear when presented with real science?

I don't, I have spent days pouring over the resources that are cited and linked in the debates I have had. I spent months reading the Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 comparison to Human Chromosome 21 and the Initial Sequence of the Chimpanzee Genome papers. I even had the rare opportunity to talk with one of the authors of the Chimpanzee Genome paper and it was fascinating. My interest in this is apologetics and this was all an experiment in evidential apologetics for me personally. I left my comfort zone when I abandoned presuppostional apologetics because I never really believed this has much to do with evidence, scientific or otherwise.

My final conclusion was that the real science is in genetics, the mythology is Darwinian philosophy. You will find that evolutionists will not seperate the two no matter how much evidence they are confronted with. This whole debate has nothing to do with science per se. Notice there are not Christian fundamentalists fighting to get equal time with genetics, chemistry or astronomy? Do you want to know why? It's because it is Darwinism, not natural science that is attacking the Christian faith, not natural science.

Two, I'm making a feeble attempt to rally creationist support in my threads. I recognize the weakness of one man's voice, how one mind can make horrendous mistakes, especially when backed into a corner. This is precisely what is happening in my latest thread. I'm asking for some support to the science I've presented, or if my science is wrong, at least support in defense of God, whom I've put all my faith in.

I can offer to read the threads but I can't post to them. I want to talk to creationists, plain and simple. More then anything else I would love to have the opportunity to help creationists, especially laymen, realize that science isn't the enemy. A little basic biology would be all that it took to get this in perspective but they won't listen to the gang tackle arguments of evolutionists on there. I have been interested in apologetics for over 15 years now and spent at least two on creationism. It's not the science, it's the supposition that is poisoning the well for creationists and I won't be a party to it any longer.

Some threads I've started and put considerable research into:

Taxonomy - Historical Order of Evolution?
Ammonites - ancient critters seem to pop into existance
DNA and Gitt information theory
Zircon helium diffusion gives age of 6000 years

I'll take a look at them and let you know what I think.

Now, I realize that I do spend most of my time on my own threads and not helping other YECs in their threads. I spent huge amounts of time outside the forum researching and can only focus on one topic at a time. At the risk of sounding selfish, I ask that YECs read my threads and post if you have anything intelligent to offer, and I encourage you all to research these topics further yourselves if the topics strikes your curiosity. If you cannot contribute in a meaningful mannor (eg. if you don't have science or appologetics to offer), please abstain from posting.

Science and apologetics I can offer, I just don't want to get involved in this ridiculas melee the regulars are into on there. Now as far as researching the subject matter, hey, no problem. I'm just not interested in these debates anymore, at least not with confirmed evolutionists.

As of right now, I'm backed into a corner on the last two threads.

In a few weeks I plan on starting a new thread that highlights the phenominal lack of incrimental "information-adding" mutations in genetic experiments that are required for a critters-to-man evolution to take place. I need to find supporting resources first, though. If you see a related post in the C&E forum in the coming weeks, please contribute!

Grace and peace to you all.

I could offer some suggestions if you are interested. It sounds like you are going straight to the subject matter I was drawn to. It's not the science that is the biggest problem for creationists, it's the fact that science has shunned creationism and it's hard to argue with someone who has their mind made up.

I have one suggestion though, just look at how mutations effect the human brain. I did and found the natural selection + mutations = human evolution scenerio laughable. I have never seen a beneficial mutation effecting the human brain, ever, not even one. Go ahead and look it up at Pub Med, PNAS or Nature Magazine, they don't exist.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[SBG]

Well, I think my approach over the last half-year has been to utilize the extreme polarities in C&E to test the metal of science itself. If there's any crack at all to the science presented, one of the polarities will find it.

Yes, the backbiting is nasty, but I try to moderate my own threads and they mostly behave.

I became a Christian about 1.5 years ago. At the time I was an evolutionist and scoffed at the creationists. But when I looked at the science more carefully, I saw I can actually put my full faith in the entirety of the Bible. I became a creationist about a year ago. I believe this full-faith has accelerated my biblical studies. For the past year, I've been sucking in as much science as I can get my hands on. It's absolutely fabulous to re-learn the world I live in from a biblical perspective! I can't get enough of it!

So, I'm not so much subjecting others to my beliefs, but using their nonbelief to evaluate the worth of the science.

Then I can see why you are doing what you are. What you might want to remember is what Mark said. Many of us feel that there isn't a point arguing with those who already have the mind firmly made up.

I think it is wonderful that you are re-learning science through a Biblical perspective! Sometimes it feels like many do not.

I would take to Mark more, he really has a lot of experience in the debates and is quite knowledgable in this area as well.

 

[RichardT]

Where are the YECs?

im here...

 

[Lisa0315]

Buho,

I can only speak for myself, but the reason that I do not post in C & E is because I do not believe that we are called to defend Creation, but to tell people of God's salvation plan. I would rather spend my forum time doing that then arguing for creation.

Lisa

 

[vossler]

I became a Christian about 1.5 years ago. At the time I was an evolutionist and scoffed at the creationists. But when I looked at the science more carefully, I saw I can actually put my full faith in the entirety of the Bible. I became a creationist about a year ago. I believe this full-faith has accelerated my biblical studies. For the past year, I've been sucking in as much science as I can get my hands on. It's absolutely fabulous to re-learn the world I live in from a biblical perspective! I can't get enough of it!

I think this is wonderful, one rarely hears about a confirmed evolutionist converting to becoming a creationist. I know that's one of the things they brag about in C & E. As the scientifically minded person that you are it is refreshing to hear you willing to relearn most of the scientific principles that were previously only presented as evolution and engrained in the public academic circles.

At the same time, I have to comment on your philosophy, vossler. I'm rather aggrivated that science is such a weak area with Christians in general. I have a Bachelor of Science in Information Systems, I started out in Computer Science, and took Physics and Astronomy in college. I'm planning on returning to get a Masters in Information Science and Theory. Is science best left for those who are "too logical" to believe in God? Do Christians find it more worthwhile to spend time in God's word and praising God than to advance their skills in science? (Or do Christians find it more worthwhile to replace science with God and spend the rest of their free time in other trivial non-God things?) These are rhetorical questions. Ultimately, yes, a heavy focus on creation science is unhealthy if it takes away from communion with God and working for God, just as unhealthy as too much TV-watching, video games, or non-God-profitable socializing.

Science is weak for me not because I'm not willing to learn but because I'm not naturally bent toward it. It would take me untold hours in order to prepare to argue a point to a crowd unwilling to listen regardless of my prowess. There are obviously better ways for me to spend my time.

I have a Bachelor of Arts in Information Systems Management and to give you a tell-tale sign concerning my bent, I hate programming. I could do it, but I wouldn't enjoy it one iota. The same is true for studying science. So science is best left for those whose bent leads them in that direction; hopefully that includes more creationists, but don't forget there are many out there who just don't waste their time in C & E for some of the very reasons Mark & SBG have already outlined.

My main purpose for spending anytime there at all is to give them the non-scientific biblical perspective.

 

[Breetai]

I'd love to help you out, but my area is theology; not science. I am in love with how the Bible is in harmony with science though, so long as you use it as the interpreter of the evidence.

Think of it this way Buho, you probably learn something new in every thread that you debate in. Even if you aren't able to convince your opponents of what you are saying, you may be able to use what you've learned with someone in the future. As well, something you might say may plan a seed on someone that will grow in the future.

 

[Biliskner]

Over the past half-year, I've been opening topics in "Open to All Members Section > Discussion & Debate > Creation & Evolution" that attempt to extend well beyond the simple PRATTs and AIG articles. Usually typical there are a few pages of insipid peanut-gallery backbiting of evolutionists and creationists, and then as I keep prodding for the truth of the underlying, unbiased science, the creationist activity drops off and I'm left to battle atheists and agnostics (who appear to be professionals in science fields; I am a pro in programming & information systems). The theistic evolutionists even tend to disappear so I'm left to defend God Himself, solo, without assistance, not to mention the science from a creation perspective.

Sorry mate, I just get sick of Christian TEs/PCs talking to us YECs like "mate, your 'creation science' is not real science" and making it out no different to if I were to pick up a copy of the Skeptical Inquirer / SCIAM / Nature and see them bagging Christian-Literal-Creation-6-Day-ists. "Debates" usually just turn out as "haha I use big words and jargon in my geology and you can't explain the 6MYO strata so I win."

Having said that, I have just recently stumbled over drdino.com and a friend and I downunder in Aussie land have been distributing his free seminars; he has been doing "screenings" with his NC friends from college and the videos have been very evangelistic prompting deep and profound doubts in the current scientific paradigm. I highly recommend it for all who are interested in this YEC/OEC debate.

I struggle to see my font 2 size when replying posts... hmmm... admin wanna fix it up?

 

[Biliskner]

Two, I'm making a feeble attempt to rally creationist support in my threads. I recognize the weakness of one man's voice, how one mind can make horrendous mistakes, especially when backed into a corner. This is precisely what is happening in my latest thread. I'm asking for some support to the science I've presented, or if my science is wrong, at least support in defense of God, whom I've put all my faith in.

I realize and feel for you, but for me (in real life & online), I see this debate (generally, IE: Creation VS Evolution) as futile, and sometimes (most of the time even?) the debates appear to be just "burning time" and turning our focus away to what is important, that is, the life, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus.
For us YECs we have to pick our battles rightly and fight the ones that can be won/worth winning; not just get consumed with the emotion of it all; othertimes (perhaps 99% of the time) we just have to be "fools for Christ" - and that is certainly no easy thing to do.

Now when ppl at my Church ask me about Genesis/Creation, I just say to them "I take it as Literal History" or if they try and ask me a general question which leads nowhere just to spark some debate - I will ask them: "Do you see Genesis as Literal History? Why? Why not?" More often than not they won't come back; some do, and they have more intelligent questions, such as: "So if Adam isn't literal then... <insert problem>" or, "What do you think about Death before Adam etc." I've also just pointed them to my website, if they are genuinely interested htey will read it and email me their questions/problem.
Those questions I'm happy to talk about, those that are Theology meshed with Historicity of the Bible, because for the majority of us, at one point in our life or another, we will question our Origins, where we came from, how it happened, and where we are going.

The Science is Iridium, Carbon Dating, Red-Shifting/Blue-Shifting Galaxies, Expanding/Inflating Universe, the rate of Stalictite deposit are indeed peripheral, but nonetheless useful in your life ahead, no matter how long or short - God will use that knowledge you have learnt to help your brothers and sisters in Christ better understand the world in which our God works; and still continues to work in, despite our best efforts.


All that aside, I can offer my help to you in areas of the History of and Philosophy of Science, and some areas of Science, specifically Newtonian Physics (some Astronomy/Theoretical Physics) and Biology (Zoological & Botanical Sciences). Forget the Geology, I found it boring enough to study the 4 types of rocks that plants grow on in alpine areas during my field trip subject. (and I can assure you that 4 types of rocks are only the very tip of the iceberg of some very boring rock-studies!)

 

[Breetai]

I realize and feel for you, but for me (in real life & online), I see this debate (generally, IE: Creation VS Evolution) as futile, and sometimes (most of the time even?) the debates appear to be just "burning time" and turning our focus away to what is important, that is, the life, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus.

If those people are accepting that the stories in the OT are mearly myth, then what's to stop them from believing that the Gospel is just a myth? I don't see a line of distinction there. If they can somehow justify believing in Christ, while rejecting the OT stories as myth, then good on them, but I think it defies logic.

 

[ignorant and stupid]

If those people are accepting that the stories in the OT are mearly myth, then what's to stop them from believing that the Gospel is just a myth? I don't see a line of distinction there. If they can somehow justify believing in Christ, while rejecting the OT stories as myth, then good on them, but I think it defies logic.

I might be a YEC, but I hate the arguing. Evolution is one of the 'strongholds' Paul talks about:

"The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds."

I don't believe arguing logically can break through the stronghold. I believe its more about prayer. And as a physicist all I know is: the person who knows the most always wins. I don't know enough to argue on a Phd level. So I don't. Also its not my calling, it maybe yours. If I can help in anyway PM me.

 

[Biliskner]

If those people are accepting that the stories in the OT are mearly myth, then what's to stop them from believing that the Gospel is just a myth? I don't see a line of distinction there. If they can somehow justify believing in Christ, while rejecting the OT stories as myth, then good on them, but I think it defies logic.

I TOTALLY agree with you, then I found out 3 years ago that one of my friends used to subscribe to AIG's Creation magazine when he was in High School. Upon coming to uni, and speaking to a few ppl (there's a magazine here called Salt, published by people who are evangelicals but hold to a "open to interpretation of Genesis-Creation-Story") he changed his mind. Now he holds (after 20,000 word E-Mails and 2 years of debate), I finally see his world-view. He holds that the language of Genesis 1-3 and the "impossiblity of events" (IE: Talking Serpent, Eating one fruit = Sin + Death for the whole of the World) means that Genesis 1-3 are just "myth" - myth in the sense that it's a fable, story that is supposed to communicate truths to us (humanity) of God's character, the orderliness of Creation, God/Man's purpose in/for Creation etc. But the actual events are not real, they're "myth" - so, it's myth, but this myth teaches correct theological truths about God.

I find his worldview hard to believe and also that it requires a larger leap of faith than taking Literal 6 Day Creation + Adam being a literal human-existing person who ate the forbidden fruit to save his wife Eve thus setting in motion a chain of events that Christ has come to redeem us out of (sin).

As an aside, he is a Christian, takes science as a hobby (he's a doctor) and his wife thinks he's a heretic for believing such lies.

I agree with his wife...

He has a website, if you're interested PM me.

As another one of my friends said:
"it's sad that he's become unstuck on this one mate."

I like to point out that this url:
http://www.grisda.org/origins/21005.htm
is a very powerful linguistical analysis of the text of Genesis 1/2.

 

[Pats]

I have taken a deep, personal interest in appolagetics for some time now. I began debating Creation vs Evo with a pagan evolutionist nearly 2 years ago. Its been interesting, to say the least. Like some others have said, I have been and am on a personal journey to examine my spiritual views, as well as learning how to share them with others in a helpfull manner.

There was nearly a time when other problems in my life and those talks cause me to seriously question and examine my beliefs. Then, I realized I couldn't turn to man's wisdom, I needed God's wisdom. I was renewed. I still know you can scientificlly/geneticlly refute evolution, and am interested in learning as much as I can about it.

I could put up with the temperment of the Creat/Evo forum, I did it when I first came here.

---Having the last word doesn't matter. It's saying what you've come to say.

Like I said, I've been debating just one pagan on this for two years. The fact that he still wants to talk about it, encourages me that he is seeking the truth. I'll be happy to continue discussions with anyone I think is seeking truth.

Once I've said my peace, I don't have to bludgeon it to death. I've said it, and that's that.

Why are those atheists and atheistic evolutionists on a Christian forum anyway? Some of them might be seeking the truth, no matter how sure they are that they've already found it. No harm in talking to them. I have no real need to win the debate per say... as long as I've had the chance to present the Truth, and they read it, my purpose for posting there would be accomplished.

 

[ignorant and stupid]

I have taken a deep, personal interest in appolagetics for some time now. I began debating Creation vs Evo with a pagan evolutionist nearly 2 years ago. Its been interesting, to say the least. Like some others have said, I have been and am on a personal journey to examine my spiritual views, as well as learning how to share them with others in a helpfull manner.

There was nearly a time when other problems in my life and those talks cause me to seriously question and examine my beliefs. Then, I realized I couldn't turn to man's wisdom, I needed God's wisdom. I was renewed. I still know you can scientificlly/geneticlly refute evolution, and am interested in learning as much as I can about it.

I could put up with the temperment of the Creat/Evo forum, I did it when I first came here.

---Having the last word doesn't matter. It's saying what you've come to say.

Like I said, I've been debating just one pagan on this for two years. The fact that he still wants to talk about it, encourages me that he is seeking the truth. I'll be happy to continue discussions with anyone I think is seeking truth.

Once I've said my peace, I don't have to bludgeon it to death. I've said it, and that's that.

Why are those atheists and atheistic evolutionists on a Christian forum anyway? Some of them might be seeking the truth, no matter how sure they are that they've already found it. No harm in talking to them. I have no real need to win the debate per say... as long as I've had the chance to present the Truth, and they read it, my purpose for posting there would be accomplished.

Do you think alot of people who believe in evolution come to know Jesus through losing arguements to educated creationist?

In fact does anyone know... CF has been around for years now, has anyone become a Christian through the brave efforts of those on the Cre Evo threads?

 

[Breetai]

Do you think alot of people who believe in evolution come to know Jesus through losing arguements to educated creationist?

In fact does anyone know... CF has been around for years now, has anyone become a Christian through the brave efforts of those on the Cre Evo threads?

I've read posts of people who have said they've come to Faith because, at least in part, of discussions that they've had on these forums. As for the Cre/Evo threads, I'm not sure...

...but, I was talking to one of my secular friends a couple of days ago, and I worked the story of Genesis and the evidence that I see of it in the culture here. He was simply floored, as the expression on his face and 5 minute silence showed. This stuff works, to those who have not had their hearts hardened.


For the record, it was two things that I think had the biggest effect on my friend. The first was the chinese character for 'big 'ol boat.' It is made up of three smaller hanja, which when separate, mean 'boat', '8' and 'mouth.' How many mouths (human) had to be fed on Noah's boat?

The other thing that made my friend's jaw drop was the connection the Korean creation myth has to Noah's flood. Basically, man came as an offspring of the 'gods.' The interesting part is the timing of it; man came to Korea in 2333 BC. For a Biblical comparison, Noah's flood was in 2344 BC (according to the Masoretic text). That part floors me as well.

There are plenty of Korean flood accounts as well.

 

[Pats]

Do you think alot of people who believe in evolution come to know Jesus through losing arguements to educated creationist?

In fact does anyone know... CF has been around for years now, has anyone become a Christian through the brave efforts of those on the Cre Evo threads?

I haven't really been here long enough to know. But I do think that Holy Spirit uses people, speaks through people, to win hearts for Jesus Christ.

 

[ignorant and stupid]

As Mike Dodge says:
"Fish where the fish are biting."

And as Jesus says(Mrk6:11):
"And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them."

I'm not saying we shouldn't love, pray and care for these people. But if arguing about evolution isn't making a big impact, maybe we should try another method? There maybe a much better way, we just have to find it...