The Barbarian

I've already pointed out why ancient Christians knew the days of Genesis were not literal days. As you know, it's logically impossible to mornings and evenings with no sun to have them. Which early Jewish or Christian theologians knew this? St. Augustine Origen Philo of Alexandria Maimonides Moses ben Nahmen Gregory of Naziansus Iranaeus of Lyon I told you that some time ago. The fall was real; Adam and Eve were real people. What you resist is God's use of real people and events in allegories.

Notice the actual photographs of whale embryos. Notice how, as the embryo grows, the nostrils move from the front of the face to the top of the head. Notice the photographs of the skulls of Pakicetus and Rhodocetus,and the movement of the nostrils back on the head. No point in denial. C'mon. It did have genes for legs and nostrils. The same genes that make legs in land animals, make fins in whales. Likewise, nostrils and blowholes. Would you like learn more about that? As you have learned, you have many, many misconceptions about genetics. This is just one of the major ones. Adaptive Evolution of 5′HoxD Genes in the Origin and Diversification of the Cetacean Flipper Zhe Wang, Lihong Yuan, Stephen J. Rossiter, Xueguo Zuo, Binghua Ru, Hui Zhong, Naijian Han, Gareth Jones, Paul D. Jepson, Shuyi Zhang Author Notes Molecular Biology and Evolution, Volume 26, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 613–622 Abstract The homeobox (Hox) genes Hoxd12 and Hoxd13 control digit patterning and limb formation in tetrapods. Both show strong expression in the limb bud during embryonic development, are highly conserved across vertebrates, and show mutations that are associated with carpal, metacarpal, and phalangeal deformities. The most dramatic evolutionary reorganization of the mammalian limb has occurred in cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), in which the hind limbs have been lost and the forelimbs have evolved into paddle-shaped flippers. We reconstructed the phylogeny of digit patterning in mammals and inferred that digit number has changed twice in the evolution of the cetacean forelimb. First, the divergence of the early cetaceans from their even-toed relatives coincided with the reacquisition of the pentadactyl forelimb, whereas the ancestors of tetradactyl baleen whales (Mysticeti) later lost a digit again. To test whether the evolution of the cetacean forelimb is associated with positive selection or relaxation of Hoxd12 and Hoxd13, we sequenced these genes in a wide range of mammals. In Hoxd12, we found evidence of Darwinian selection associated with both episodes of cetacean forelimb reorganization. In Hoxd13, we found a novel expansion of a polyalanine tract in cetaceans compared with other mammals (17/18 residues vs. 14/15 residues, respectively), lengthening of which has previously been shown to be linked to synpolydactyly in humans and mice. Both genes also show much greater sequence variation among cetaceans than across other mammalian lineages. Our results strongly implicate 5′HoxD genes in the modulation of digit number, web forming, and the high morphological diversity of the cetacean manus. Because genetics is a mystery to you, you knew nothing about this. But geneticists know. Why not take a little time, learn some basic things about genetics and it will go better for you.

Darwin, not really aware of any evidence for live being brought forth by the earth, suggested that God just created the first living things. Today, evidence increasingly indicates that God did indeed create life by natural means. I think most IDers accept natural selection. It's an observed fact, after all. I think Jonathan Wells doesn't, but I'm guessing that is because it contradicts some of the Unification Church doctrines. I believe Philip Johnson did not, but he's a lawyer and not very familiar with biology.

Actually, evolutionary theory doesn't make any claims about the origin of life. Darwin, for example, just assumed God made the first living things. So no. Theories only have to explain things they make claims about. Nope. Someone's really, really misled you about that. Evolution is an observed phenomenon. You seem to have confused it with cosmology or abiogenesis. Do a little reading and find out what it's about. The observation that populations tend to become more fit to their environment over time. The Italian lizards that evolved a new digestive organ in a few decades for example. Or Darwin's finches which showed changes in genes and phenotypes as conditions changed on their islands. Things like that.

Let me show you something you have not realized: Phillipians 2:9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, So the Father has exalted Him and and bestowed on him the name that is above every name. Do you think that the name of Jesus is above the name of the Father? Let us know what you think. No, that's wrong. The Israelites never knew the word "Jehovah." That's a modern revision of "YHWH", which was pronounced "Yahwe." Worshiping the Bible is an act of idolatry. And your Psalm says that God's word is set above God's name. Which is not the same as saying that scripture is greater than God.

Didn't call them God, though. And there's a reason for that. I just told you that the Bible is holy and God's word. The fact that you consider that to be denying the Bible, is telling. But it isn't God, and it's very wrong to worship it. And orthodox Trinitarian Christian, who doesn't confuse God with His word.

I appreciate your kindness, but I'm pretty thick-skinned. Please excuse my bluntness; it's something on which I'm trying to do better.

As you now realize, even many ancient Jewish theologians knew that Genesis is an allegory. So did many ancient Christians. Your exceptions notwithstanding. Instead of revising His word, just accept it as it is.

No. God is the creator of the universe. The Bible is holy and God's word, but it is not God. It is wrong to worship the Bible. And be careful, as when you make your God your opinion, you have truly lost your way. Being a YE creationist won't cost you your salvation. Making an idol of the Bible might be such an error. Only worship God, not a book of His words to us.

Obviously, "Christian" has a different meaning for you than for other Christians. And Jesus makes it very clear in Matthew 25, how He will judge who goes with Him and who goes with the devil and his angels. And it's not belonging to the right church, or what you think of evolution. I thought you said you were Christian. I never knew of a Christian who would do that.

I've presented you with dozens of them. You are the spiritual descendant of the geocentrists who refused Galileo's offer to look into his telescope and see for themselves. But they do. The same genes that code for wings on bats and legs on humans, also code for fins on whales. The same genes that code for nostrils, code for blowholes. As your fellow YE creationist, Kurt Wise points out, these are confirmed by transitional forms. Blowholes... three stages of a whale in embryonic development. Notice the nostrils form in the usual mammalian position,and then later move to the top of the head to form a blowhole. Notice also the limb buds that form like those of most mammals, and then change shape to form flippers. As you see, Wise is quite correct. The evidence for the evolution of whales is very good. On the other hand, you can't post any evidence to support your unbiblical and unscientific case.

No. God's word is holy and true, but it is not God. Bibliolatry is a serious error, and an affront to God.

Actually, the Roman Catholic church never made geocentrism a doctrine,although there were many Catholics who agreed with Luther and Calvin that the Earth was at the center of the universe and did not move. Some of them were responsible for the Galileo affair, although it was more due to politics than theology. Just as Lutherans and Calvinists were never required to believe in Geocentrism, even if Luther and Calvin did.

Well, let's take a look... Other Jews and Christians have long regarded the creation account of Genesis as an allegory - even prior to the development of modern science and the scientific accounts (based on the scientific method) of cosmological, biological and human origins. Notable proponents of allegorical interpretation include the Christian theologian Augustine of Hippo, who in the 4th century, on theological grounds, argued that God created everything in the universe in the same instant, and not in six days as a plain reading of Genesis would require;[2][3] and the even earlier 1st-century Jewish scholar Philo of Alexandria, who wrote that it would be a mistake to think that creation happened in six days or in any determinate amount of time.[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegorical_interpretations_of_Genesis So that's not debatable, unless you chose to ignore historical fact and the testimony of the Bible itself. You're free to to that, and it won't endanger your salvation unless you make an idol of your new doctrines. Otherwise, you are just as much a Christian as anyone who accepts evolution.

You still don't get what's going on with speciation. It's a change in allele frequencies in a population that makes that population reproductively isolated from other populations. Mutation change the genome of a new individual, relative to its parents, and this changes the allele frequencies in the population genome. This is why creationist groups generally admit the fact of speciation. It's directly observed to happen.

See above. Everything you claimed was adequately rebutted. If you think I missed something, I'd be pleased to show you again. Dr. Wise listed dozens of facts. And linked you to the papers in which the data was available. Dr. Wise is a YE creationist. He's just honest enough to admit the facts. And he linked dozens of papers backing up his facts: Gingerich, P. D., 1994. The whales of Tethys. Natural History, 103(4):86– 88. Gould, S. J., 1994. Hooking leviathan by its past. Natural History,103(5):9–15 Zimmer, C., 1995. Back to the sea. Discover, 16(l):82–84 Zimmer, C., 1995. Coming onto the land. Discover, 16(6): 118–127 Wise, K. P., 1994. Australopithecus ramidus and the fossil record. CENTech. J., 8(2): 160–165 Wise, K. P., 1990. Baraminology: A young-earth creation biosystematic method. In:Proceedings of the Second International Conference onCreationism, R. E. Walsh and C. L. Brooks (eds), Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Vol. 2, pp. 345–360 Wise, K. P., 1991. Practical baraminology. CEN Tech. J., 6(2): 122–137 Wise, K. P., 1992. Creation polycladism: A young-earth creation theory of biogenesis. In:Proceedings of the 1992 Twin-Cities CreationConference, Twin-Cities Creation Science Association, Genesis Institute, and Northwestern College, Minneapolis-St Paul, Minnesota, pp. 204–210. Wise, K. P., 1994. Origin of life's major groups. In:The CreationHypothesis, J. P. Moreland (ed.), InterVarsity Press, Downer’s Grove, Illinois, pp. 211–234 Austin, S. A., Baumgardner, J. R., Humphreys, D. R., Snelling, A. A., Vardiman, L. and Wise, K. P., 1994. Catastrophic plate tectonics: A global Flood model of earth history. In:Proceedings of the Third InternationalConference on Creationism, R. E. Walsh (ed.), Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, pp. 609–621. Stewart, W. N. and Rothwell, G. W., 1993. Paleobotany and the Evolutionof Plants, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,England, pp. 114-115. Gould, S. J., 1989. Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Natureof History, Norton, New York, pp. 321–323 Carroll, R. L., 1988. Vertebrate Paleontology and Evolution, Freeman, New York, p. 467 Carroll, ibid, p. 473. Hopson, J. A., 1994. Synapsid evolution and the radiation of non-eutherian mammals. In:Major Features of Vertebrate Evolution [Short Courses in Paleontology Number 7], D. R. Porthero and R. M. Schoch (eds), Paleontological Society, Knoxville, Tennessee, pp. 190–219. Ostrom, J. H., 1994. On the origin of birds and of avian flight. In:MajorFeatures of Vertebrate Evolution [Short Courses in Paleontology Number 7], D. R. Prothero and R. M. Schoch (eds), Paleontological Society, Knoxville, Tennessee, pp. 160–177. Thomson, K. S., 1994. The origin of the tetrapods. In:Major Featuresof Vertebrate Evolution [Short Courses in Paleontology Number 7], D. R. Prothero and R. M. Schoch (eds), Paleontological Society, Knoxville, Tennessee, pp. 85–107. Ahlberg, P. E. and Milner, A. R., 1994. The origin and early diversification of tetrapods. Nature, 368:507–514. No point in you denying all of this. Instead of denying the reality, find a way to accommodate it in your belief system.

Chinese calligraphy is interesting too. Did you have a point? If 1000 years = 1 day for God, and 1 day = 1000 years, tell us how that is "literal." So just show us where it says he walked through a wall, and you've made your point. Or you could say that you added "walked through a wall", because it seemed reasonable to you. One of those. It's precisely because I believe the Bible is God's word, that think it's a bad idea to add things to it. I'd rather take the Bible as it is. Sorry. It's not that you'll lose your salvation for inserting new material into it. You're no less a Christian than we are. But I think you'd be closer Him and to the rest of us, if you'd just let it be as it is.

No, Good is beyond human comprehension. You're kidding yourself if you think you can understand the nature of God. You can only know some things about him. You do not comprehend the Trinity and Unity of God. It is beyond human comprehension.

Converting a figurative verse to literal history is something. Show us how your combination of "day" in Genesis and "thousand years" in Peter is merely quoting. You've completely misunderstood... Actually, it's 2 Peter 3:8 But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. It's also figurative. God is eternal, and for Him there is no time. Time is merely of this world, but it has no meaning at all in the rest of creation. But for you to add "walk through a wall" is a biggie. Unwise for you to add anything that is not written therein.

You've merely assumed that a figurative verse is a literal history. Even ancient Christians knew better. Proof texting is probably the least effective form of eisegesis. I don't think you've given this very much thought. Inserting things into scripture that aren't there in God's words, is unwise, I think. So you assume that if He was capable of walking through walls, He did. Bad assumption, I think. What makes you think that He's confined to 3 dimensions? No 3D room is closed to a higher dimensional being. In your case, it seems you also get to add to the word of God. How does that work?

This is all man's re-interpretation of God's word. Worth no more than any other man's opinion. And now, we don't comprehend God. No created being can do that. We can know Him, but we cannot begin to understand the mystery of the Trinity, or his eternal being.

If we declare so, we are just kidding ourselves. God is beyond all human understanding. Philippians 4:7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. Well, let's take a look... Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. Sorry, God disagrees with you. That's a modern revision of Genesis. Let it be God's way, instead of yours.

I notice you can't offer factual rebuttals to any of the things I've shown you. That's a very telling point. There's no point in you denying what you have been given. Eveyone knows it. The facts Wise cited (and linked to the papers with the data) were made available to you from the start. Everyone who read it, knows this. There are perhaps people following the conversation, and while you may deny the facts, they can check the references for themselves. So you've been very helpful in the process. You too. May God bless and keep you.

Hmm... never heard that one before... (Barbarian checks) No, I see nothing therein about walking through walls. Like a literal six-day creation, it's an addition to scripture based on a personal interpretation.

The mystery of the Trinity is beyond any human comprehension. What we must do to be saved, that's comprehensible. God is beyond all human understanding. He didn't use evolution to create life. He says the earth brought forth living things as He intended. Let God be what He is, and just trust Him. Let the rest of it go.