Why Creation Is Right and Evolution Is Wrong.

[Guest shiloh357]

2 minutes ago, vlad said:

There is a difference "knowable" and "You would know the ways of God if you read your Bible." "Would  know" and "knowable" are worlds apart. 

No difference at all given that it is through the Bible that God reveals himself to us.   The  Bible is chock full of knowable information about God and the instructions on how to know God better.

Edited January 7, 2018 by shiloh357

[JohnD]

Evolution's fatal flaw is that it cannot explain how nothing according to the laws of physics is eternal, and nothing can come into existence from nothing. Period.

Continuing to believe in an untruth like evolution is an exercise in blind faith.

A religion.

Which is what evolutionists like to accuse Christians of.

Like the liberals... accuse others of what you are guilty of and get special investigators to spend millions or billions of dollars needlessly. 

Evolutionists have been doing this for over a century now.

I used to study how to answers these fools (Institute for Creation Research / Answers in Genesis and others) used to be a frequent visitor of the ICR museum and library in Santee, California (I lived in Tierra Santa section of San Diego at the time). Footnote: I certainly do no disparage going to the trouble of answering atheists (if for no other reason it encourages believers and potential believers that ours is a faith founded on facts). It's just not for me anymore.

Then I discovered a fool is a fool is a fool and generally remains a fools to their dying breath.  Show a fool the truth once, then walk away. If you are so led or love them (like a relative or something) pray for them and try top show them the truth... but don't waste time better spent on receptive individuals who are truly seeking actual truth.

[vlad]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

No difference at all given that it is through the Bible that God reveals himself to us.   The  Bible is chock full of knowable information about God and the instructions on how to know God better.

The key point to this argument is that you consider all creations of God perfect and only perfect. But they are perfect to us. human beings. But there is no proof that some creations did not seem perfect from God's point of view and are to be destroyed by Him. "...and God saw that it was good." That means that there probably was an alternative. He liked it. And what if He did not? He is free to change anything. Then I remember about those pots (Rom. 9, 21, 22). Some things are made for dishonor to be later destroyed. There is nothing to prove that God is not behind some evolution. That makes Him even greater. Even if we disagree in  this particular point there is still all the rest and the main things in common between us and I respect your opinion and I love you as a Christian and brother.

[JohnD]

I like to watch the Science Channel especially with regards to the universe.

When atheists try to explain the enormity of it in their feeble terms they are quickly at a loss.

It is an exponential expanse unpacking itself (upwelling) as time passes. 

Gone are dating methods and speed of light calculations (even though the factual evidence that time dilates and the speed of light is decaying are indisputable) it does not matter. 

The universe itself is spreading out (which the Bible mentions as opening a curtain or spreading out a tent).

And as far as macro-evolution goes... there is yet to be found one legitimate transitional form anywhere.

 

[JohnD]

The latest gig in atheist science is exo-planets.

Can't see 'em (too small to far away). Yet a wobble in their stars are good enough to embolden these dreamers to describe vacation spots on these yet to be proven exo-planets.

I've seen the data with the wobble and the blinking of the star light... extremely subjective. Could be a brown dwarf wobbling the star, or thick asteroid belts dimming the star light at intervals.

And how close to the star (the Goldy Lox zone) is also debatable.

The best thing to do is what SETI did back in the 1980's, use as a base for calculating probabilities a known subject (namely our sun and planets and Earth in particular).

All the intricate balances in physics to enable like to exist on this one planet are mind boggling.

The orbit has to be roughly circular. The size and mass, distance from the sun, having a moon the size of Erth's moon, the axis tilt, just to name a few.

So there may actually be exo-planets. Given the much longer list of necessary balances for life on Earth to exist even atheist evolutionists have to admit there would be extremely few exo-planets that would fit the bill in the ENTIRE UNIVERSE.

Then they usually go off on a tear about the multiverse. Again... blind faith.

[JohnD]

God, who by his own description of himself, transcends the laws of physics in that he is eternal and does create all things from nothing IS the only possible explanation for the existence of anything.

Otherwise, none of it (or us) would be here.

[Guest shiloh357]

32 minutes ago, vlad said:

The key point to this argument is that you consider all creations of God perfect and only perfect. But they are perfect to us. human beings. But there is no proof that some creations did not seem perfect from God's point of view and are to be destroyed by Him.

No, God called them perfect, when He used the Hebrew phrase "tov-meod."    God didn't qualify that with only some of creation.   God doesn't and cannot create imperfection.

Imperfection in Creation (death, disease, sickness, decay) didn't happen until after man sinned.  We brought imperfection into the perfect world that God created.

Quote

"...and God saw that it was good." That means that there probably was an alternative. He liked it. And what if He did not? He is free to change anything.

God doesn't have different standards for "good."  "Good" where God is concerned is perfect.  God doesn't change.  

Quote

Then I remember about those pots (Rom. 9, 21, 22). Some things are made for dishonor to be later destroyed.

No, that is not talking about creation and God destroying part of creation.   You really need to pay attention to context.   Paul was defending God's sovereign choice to use Israel as He did and cause a partial blindness to come upon them so that Gentiles could enter the Kingdom  of God.    The metaphor about the potter and the clay only serves to highlight the sovereignty of the potter over the clay to use it for whatever purpose He chooses. It has nothing to do with creation.

 

Quote

There is nothing to prove that God is not behind some evolution.

Evolution doesn't exist.  It has never been empirically proven and is not intuitively observed.

Quote

That makes Him even greater.

No, it doesn't make Him greater.   It makes God and all of Scripture into liars.  It means that the Bible can't be fully trusted, that not everything it says is true.   It means that God is a liar and that sin isn't the cause of death.   It contradicts all of the basic theology of the Bible.

That's why Richard Dawkins said that Evolution makes an Atheist a more fulfilled Atheist.  Sorry, but on a fundamental level, there is little to nothing we can agree on, at all.

[vlad]

3 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

No, God called them perfect, when He used the Hebrew phrase "tov-meod."    God didn't qualify that with only some of creation.   God doesn't and cannot create imperfection.

Imperfection in Creation (death, disease, sickness, decay) didn't happen until after man sinned.  We brought imperfection into the perfect world that God created.

God doesn't have different standards for "good."  "Good" where God is concerned is perfect.  God doesn't change.  

No, that is not talking about creation and God destroying part of creation.   You really need to pay attention to context.   Paul was defending God's sovereign choice to use Israel as He did and cause a partial blindness to come upon them so that Gentiles could enter the Kingdom  of God.    The metaphor about the potter and the clay only serves to highlight the sovereignty of the potter over the clay to use it for whatever purpose He chooses. It has nothing to do with creation.

 

Evolution doesn't exist.  It has never been empirically proven and is not intuitively observed.

No, it doesn't make Him greater.   It makes God and all of Scripture into liars.  It means that the Bible can't be fully trusted, that not everything it says is true.   It means that God is a liar and that sin isn't the cause of death.   It contradicts all of the basic theology of the Bible.

That's why Richard Dawkins said that Evolution makes an Atheist a more fulfilled Atheist.  Sorry, but on a fundamental level, there is little to nothing we can agree on, at all.

As you put it: "No, God called them perfect, when He used the Hebrew phrase "tov-meod." Are you sure God used a human language when he created this world?   I doubt that very much. I think you you are not sure of that. God's word is not a human word. It was a kind of approximation for the human beings to understand.

Your message: " The metaphor about the potter and the clay only serves to highlight the sovereignty of the potter over the clay to use it for whatever purpose He chooses. It has nothing to do with creation." In my opinion it is not so much about creation. I am afraid it is about discussing things we do not perfectly understand. Ironically that may be about us and our discussion. I have doubts. All what I say is "may be". I guess in this unknown delicate  field no one can claim ultimate truth. That was my impulse to enter the discussion when I felt there was like claiming the ultimate truth based on secondary constructions which I would advise people to avoid.

You say: " It makes God and all of Scripture into liars.  It means that the Bible can't be fully trusted, that not everything it says is true.   It means that God is a liar and that sin isn't the cause of death.   It contradicts all of the basic theology of the Bible." All the truth is not written of course. As John put it: "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose  that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written." Not all the truth is revealed. That is a fact. The time has not come yet. Then you will learn about evolution and all the details. There is no direct negation of evolution in the Bible. Secondary logical constructions will lead us nowhere just like medieval discussions about the number of evil spirits on the needlepoint. Let us just not be too sure of what we are saying about things we do not read about in the Bible directly. Secondary constructions may lead to an infinite number of assertions and prohibitions like writing one more Bible. That is a real danger. Better say frankly that we do not know. For if when the time comes it will be shown to us that we are wrong, what shall we say?

Edited January 7, 2018 by vlad

[Guest shiloh357]

20 minutes ago, vlad said:

As you put it: "No, God called them perfect, when He used the Hebrew phrase "tov-meod." Are you sure God used a human language when he created this world?   I doubt that very much. I think you you are not sure of that. God's word is not a human word. It was a kind of approximation for the human beings to understand.

 I don't know what language God used.  But the Bible records what God said and I believe the Bible and the Bible that God inspired says that God said that all of creation was very good.  And "tov-meod"  communicates what God said.   If you have a problem believing the Bible, then maybe you have a problem with believing God, too.

Quote

Your message: " The metaphor about the potter and the clay only serves to highlight the sovereignty of the potter over the clay to use it for whatever purpose He chooses. It has nothing to do with creation." In my opinion it is not so much about creation. I am afraid it is about discussing things we do not perfectly understand. Ironically that may be about us and our discussion. I have doubts.

No, it is not about discussing things we don't understand; it is about something you refuse to accept.   I can

Quote

All what I say is "may be". I guess in this unknown delicate  field no one can claim ultimate truth. That was my impulse to enter the discussion when I felt there was like claiming the ultimate truth based on secondary constructions which I would advise people to avoid.

I can claim ultimate truth.  I have the ultimate truth in the Person of Jesus Christ and His written word.  I can put 100% of my faith and trust in it.  Apparently, you can't.  There is nothing secondary about my claim to ultimate truth.

 

Quote

You say: " It makes God and all of Scripture into liars.  It means that the Bible can't be fully trusted, that not everything it says is true.   It means that God is a liar and that sin isn't the cause of death.   It contradicts all of the basic theology of the Bible." All the truth is not written of course. As John put it: "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose  that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written."

All truth that God wants us to know has been revealed.  It is our duty to study and learn it.  And there is enough truth revealed in scripture to drive a stake through the heart of this silly myth called Evolution.

Quote

Not all the truth is revealed. That is a fact. The time has not come yet. Then you will learn about evolution and all the details. There is no direct negation of evolution in the Bible.

Yes, there and honest skeptics and Atheists like Dawkins know that to be true.  Christians are less honest than skeptics when it comes to Evolution.  Pretty bad when unbelievers can tell the truth and so-called "Christians"  are the ones who promote the lie.

Quote

Secondary logical constructions will lead us nowhere just like medieval discussions about the number of evil spirits on the needlepoint.

There is nothing secondary about any logical constructions I am operating from.  

Quote

Let us just not be too sure of what we are saying about things we do not read about in the Bible directly. 

I can be sure of everything I am saying because of the light I get from Scripture on the matter of origins.  

Quote

Secondary constructions may lead to an infinite number of assertions and prohibitions like writing one more Bible. That is a real danger. Better say frankly that we do not know. For if when the time comes it will be shown to us that we are wrong, what shall we say?

You may not know.  Taht's your problem.  I am not going to join you in that realm of confusion.   I don't need to.  I have the inspire, inerrant and infallible word of God.  

[HAZARD]

4 hours ago, vlad said:

The key point to this argument is that you consider all creations of God perfect and only perfect. But they are perfect to us. human beings. But there is no proof that some creations did not seem perfect from God's point of view and are to be destroyed by Him. "...and God saw that it was good." That means that there probably was an alternative. He liked it. And what if He did not? He is free to change anything. Then I remember about those pots (Rom. 9, 21, 22). Some things are made for dishonor to be later destroyed. There is nothing to prove that God is not behind some evolution. That makes Him even greater. Even if we disagree in  this particular point there is still all the rest and the main things in common between us and I respect your opinion and I love you as a Christian and brother.

Hi Vlad, God made everything as it is. Nothing changed or developed over time. 

John 1:1-3, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    2, The same was in the beginning with God.
    3, All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made.