Jump to content

The Barbarian

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    541
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

136 Neutral

3 Followers

About The Barbarian

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That's because the classification is a functional one. It's why bats are classified by the Bible as birds. They are animals that fly. Scientific classification is by descent. By definition, it does. As you learned, even YE creationists admit that speciation produces new species. You were told several times. A mutation in an egg or sperm cell will do this. Even creationists admit it. You have dozens of mutations that neither of your parents have. It's caused when a mutation happens during formation of eggs or sperm.
  2. All the great intellectuals I have known, were succinct in their writing and speaking. Eisenhower was apparently not one of them.
  3. Well, let's take a look. You wrote: I pointed out that your additions to "after its kind" are man-made, and not found in scripture. And you have no excuse. I pointed this out to you at least once, probably more. Shame on you.
  4. I think he now realizes it, but he's having trouble saying so.
  5. Nope. I agreed that He created every living thing after it's kind. I merely pointed out that you don't approve of the way He did it. Nope. You got that wrong. "Reproduces after it's kind" is not in the Bible. That's man's addition to "created according to kind." You're still confused. I'm just pointing out the parts of your new doctrine that are man-made. As I showed you, Genesis, minus your additions, is entirely true. And there are some forms of creationism that are not in conflict with Genesis. YE creationism is not one of those forms. Yep. God created all things. You just don't like the way He did some of it. Fortunately, you won't lose your salvation over it. God created all things. He willed the creation of new organisms to be by evolution. He could have, as in stories of weaker nature gods, just poofed living things into existance. But being the almighty God of the universe, He merely made the universe so that the earth would bring forth animals as He intended. Creationists are not comfortable with a Creator that powerful and wise.
  6. Until you can realize that the data matters, you're going to be circling. The data shown by the pictures and graphs are evidence. That's what you were shown.
  7. A salesman was traveling through the Ozarks, and stopped this little gas station/convenience store/restaurant. When he went inside, he sees three guys and a dog sitting around a table playing poker. "The dog can actually play?" "Sure can." "That's the smartest dog I've every seen." The store owner leans over and whispers. "He's not so smart. Whenever he gets a good hand, he wags his tail."
  8. Nope. I agreed that He created every living thing after it's kind. He just didn't say how he did that, and of course didn't say that they would always reproduce after their kind. This is why creationist organizations like AIG have pointed out: Before the time of Charles Darwin, a false idea had crept into the church—the belief in the “fixity” or “immutability” of species. According to this view, each species was created in precisely the same form that we find it today. The Bible nowhere teaches that species are fixed and unchanging. https://answersingenesis.org/natural-selection/speciation/ If you keep on making up ideas and insisting that I said them, you're not going to do very well. Yes, the concept of "reproduce after it's kind" is man's revision of God's word, which says that living things were created according to their kind (but doesn't specify how). That doesn't mean God's word doesn't mean what it says. It means some men have tried to change His word to suit them. I'm sure you aren't trying to be deceptive. I'm thinking that for some reason, you're not reading what I write very carefully. How would there be an animal not fully formed? Even the earliest transitional organisms are fully formed. Evolutionary theory shows that it's very unlikely to have any organisms passing on their genes if they are not fully formed and capable of survival in their own right. I'm surprised anyone would think that was possible. This is what I meant when I said that most people who oppose evolution, don't really understand what it is. Every transitional had to be fully formed and capable of surviving in its environment before it could diversify into new species. Remember, when you start getting excited, you start writing all sorts of imaginative things,most of which are not true, as in this instance. Take a little time and think about it before you just start writing. They are called "mutation" and "natural selection." And yes, if the population lives in an environment that is relatively constant, natural selection will actually prevent evolution, as Darwin pointed out. Only when the environment changes significantly, will a previously well-fitted population evolve. Would you like to see some examples?
  9. Yes, my dog is a very deep thinker.
  10. "Lord, help me to become the kind of person my dog thinks I am."
  11. I get that you disagree with other Christians on how to interpret the creation story. That doesn't mean you or most Christians are denying the truth of the Bible. You're denying what other Christians think it is and they deny what you think it is. None of us is God and so we can disagree with each other, without saying God is wrong. If you thought about it for a while, I'm sure you could see this is true. The important part is for each of us to remember that we aren't God. And to remember how you interpret Genesis is not how you will be judged.
  12. And it doesn't say how. Lots of people have added their own ideas to scripture, but that's not God's word. If He thought it was important He would have told us. ...an appalling falsehood. I can only hope that you're just upset and don't realize what you are saying. I merely accept the Bible as it is, without man's additions. And God won't care if you don't agree on exactly how things were created. None of us will be judged on that. No. It's parable. As even ancient Christians understood. And God doesn't care whether you accept it or redo it as a literal history, unless you make an idol of your opinion and insist Christians must believe it. Do you honestly think that sort of behavior is going to convince anyone you're right? Calm yourself and remember you're trying to be an imitation of the one Who died for you. To you He may be an opinion. But to Christians He's our Creator and Savior. He is yours too, if you truly believe. Your opinion is not the Bible. It's just your opinion, and most of the world's Christians don't agree with you. And that's not "spitting" on you, much less spitting on the Bible. It seems, I offended you at some point in the past. If so, I ask your forgiveness; I may be blunt, but I don't intend to hurt anyone. Let it go; forgiveness is something you do for yourself as much as for for those who have trespassed against you. If you don't, it will corrode your soul. It didn't hurt me; I wasn't even aware that I affected you so. It hurt you, and I'm sorry that I said whatever it was that did this. Let it heal now.
  13. As you now realize, it's directly observed, and even creationist websites admit the fact. As you also learned, even creationist websites admit that new species appear from older species.
  14. No. If it did, that would be in conflict with God's word that He didn't create life ex nihilo. If you knew the Bible better, you'd have realized that. Genesis 1:24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done. Your fellow creationists don't agree with you on this, BTW: They sometimes try to defend the acceptance of millions of years by saying that bara refers to supernatural creation ex nihilo (Latin for “out of nothing”) but that asah means to make out of pre-existing material and therefore allows for creation over a long period of time. ... But this argument will not stand when we look carefully at the use of these words in Genesis 1 and in other biblical passages related to creation. https://answersingenesis.org/genesis/did-god-create-bara-or-make-asah-in-genesis-1/ And notice it doesn't say animals reproduce after their kind. Well, let's take a look... Genesis 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind. It says God made them according to their kinds, not that they reproduce according to their kinds. As you learned, we see evolution in every new organism, each with mutations that were present in neither parent. I already showed you that. But I'm a very patient guy... Every time human DNA is passed from one generation to the next it accumulates 100–200 new mutations, according to a DNA-sequencing analysis of the Y chromosome. Published online 27 August 2009 | Nature | doi:10.1038/news.2009.864 No, they documented evolutionary changes in beaks within species of finches. Learn about it here: On a desert island in the heart of the Galapagos archipelago, where Darwin received his first inklings of the theory of evolution, two scientists, Peter and Rosemary Grant, have spent twenty years proving that Darwin did not know the strength of his own theory. For among the finches of Daphne Major, natural selection is neither rare nor slow: it is taking place by the hour, and we can watch. https://www.amazon.com/Beak-Finch-Story-Evolution-Time/dp/067973337X As you learned, Answers in Genesis confirms natural selection. Since it's directly observed, there's no point in denying the fact. Morning is when the Sun appears, and evening is when it sets. Even ancient Christians recognized this. If you don't use words as they are used by everyone else, you'll always be miscommunicating. So the moon rising is morning, and when it sets, it's evening? Sorry, that's just not true. AIG admits the observed fact of speciation: Before the time of Charles Darwin, a false idea had crept into the church—the belief in the “fixity” or “immutability” of species. According to this view, each species was created in precisely the same form that we find it today. The Bible nowhere teaches that species are fixed and unchanging. You and the other creationists need to get your stories straight, then. Let us know when you figure out what you guys think. God disagrees; He says the earth brought forth living things, as He intended. That is creation from the earth, not from nothing. You're wrong again... Gen 1:20 God also said: Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life, and the fowl that may fly over the earth under the firmament of heaven. It's not Hebrew. It's Latin. Literally, "from nothing." Creation of animals was, according to god, de terra, not ex nihilo. Actually, the version from which the Bible was prepared was Koine Greek, not Hebrew or Latin. But it remains true that "ex nihilo" means "from nothing", and as you just learned, God says that life came from the earth and water, not from nothing. No. But I respect you guys for your piety and Christian behavior. You just got Genesis wrong. God says otherwise: Genesis 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul. You are a soul, according to God. He says it directly. Do you deny it? I thought SDAs agreed with God on this.
×
×
  • Create New...