The Problem With Evolution Part 2- Animals

[RV_Wizard]

1 hour ago, The Barbarian said:

In the Middle Ages, Saadia Gaon argued that a biblical passage should not be interpreted literally if that made a passage mean something contrary to the senses or reason (or, as we would say, science; Emunot ve-Deot, chapter 7).

Therefore, even though the dead are resurrected ten times in the Bible, since a resurrection defies science and reason it must not have happened.  There are 333 miracles listed in the Bible, none of which must have happened if we are to believe Saadia Gaon.  Personally, I prefer to believe Jesus.  You can believe who you want.

[FJK]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

I prefer to believe Jesus.  You can believe who you want.

I wish people would just come right out and say they don't believe the Bible rather than trying to covertly justify it and subtly persuading others to do the same.

Honesty about what you believe is as important as the belief itself.

IMO.

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

Therefore, even though the dead are resurrected ten times in the Bible, since a resurrection defies science and reason it must not have happened.

Science does not and cannot deny miracles.   But if you get to call in a non-scriptural miracle to cover up any errors in reading scripture, than any story is equally plausible.

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

There are 333 miracles listed in the Bible, none of which must have happened if we are to believe Saadia Gaon.

Wrong.   He's merely reluctant to insert unscriptural miracles to cover up problems with a particular interpretation.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by The Barbarian

[The Barbarian]

7 minutes ago, FJK said:

I wish people would just come right out and say they don't believe the Bible rather than trying to covertly justify it and subtly persuading others to do the same.

I guess I could say that I wish people would just come right out and say they don't believe the Bible, rather than inventing their own interpretations and adding them to scripture.

But then I'd be doing the same thing they do.   There is no universal agreement on some of this, and for those things, it does not mean people on different sides of the issue are not good Christians.

 

Edited September 25, 2023 by The Barbarian

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

No, molecules to man is the evolutionist explanation for the origin of life. 

This goes back to the observation that people who think they hate science don't know very much about it.   Evolutionary theory is not about the origin of life.   Darwin just supposed that God created the first living things.   But few creationists know anything at all about it.

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

While objectively evolution does not specifically require a single original progenitor

In fact, Darwin suggested that there might be any number of originally created things.   Only after genetics was rediscovered, and DNA analysis showed that all known living things on Earth have a common ancestor, did that belief become refuted.

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

taken to its explanation of origins it cites a universal ancestry between humans and daffodils.

Yes, the evidence shows all prokaryotes have a common ancestor.   Would you like to learn how we know?

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

Again you cite the partial verse saying that the earth brought forth life while denying the following verse.  "And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good" (Genesis 1:25).

Of course He did.  You just don't approve of the way He did it.

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

Why do you think it is, that even after I've pointed this out to you at least a dozen times that you continue to misrepresent the Scriptures?

There's a difference between disagreeing with you and misrepresenting the scriptures.   And I'm not convinced that you get the difference.

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

The Bible CLEARLY says that GOD made everything that creeps on the earth after its kind in a single day.

Since Genesis indicates that they are not literal days, that's not what you think it is.

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

Species can adapt, but evolution is a lie.

Evolution is observed constantly around us.   Perhaps you don't know what biological evolution is.  What do you think it is?

 

[teddyv]

20 minutes ago, FJK said:

I wish people would just come right out and say they don't believe the Bible rather than trying to covertly justify it and subtly persuading others to do the same.

Honesty about what you believe is as important as the belief itself.

IMO.

Massive strawman.

I could care less if you are a YEC. It is your interpretation, informed by whatever/whomever that may be. You are judging other interpretations against your own interpretation and are insinuating it to be a salvation issue, further couching the accusation by claiming "in my opinion".

[FJK]

2 minutes ago, teddyv said:

Massive strawman.

I could care less if you are a YEC. It is your interpretation, informed by whatever/whomever that may be. You are judging other interpretations against your own interpretation and are insinuating it to be a salvation issue, further couching the accusation by claiming "in my opinion".

Why?

And is there something wrong with stating something is my opinion when it is my opinion and I'm not suggesting it is a spiritual or Biblical Truth of some kind?

[JimmyB]

3 hours ago, George said:

Actually, it was done to anyone on Moderator Review as it turns out that people were posting something, then once the post was approved .... simply posted something that wouldn't have been approved then the post was reported.  It was simply creating even more work for moderators.  So we simply removed editing from anyone on Moderator Review.   Personally, I wish that people could simply talk to one another in love all the time, but human nature seems to get the best of us at times.   Be blessed! 

I understand, but sometimes editing needs to be done to correct spelling, grammar, etc. or modify something already written to make it clearer.

Not everything is done with nefarious intent.

[RV_Wizard]

1 hour ago, teddyv said:

Quote

I could care less if you are a YEC. It is your interpretation, informed by whatever/whomever that may be. 

Interpretation is when you take something ambiguous and explain it according to your opinion of the context and meaning.

Revelation is when you put the complete passage out there within the proper context and let it speak for itself.  The Bible is very clear about a six day creation, whether you believe it or not.

Distortion is when you take a fraction of a verse and claim that it means something it dos not mean.  When a clear reading of the entire passage shows your distortion, it's easy to point out.  There are no passages in the Bible which support evolution, though people pick and choose a few words here or there and claim that it does.

Heresy is when you try to teach that which is diametrically opposed in the Bible.

Quote

You are judging other interpretations against your own interpretation and are insinuating it to be a salvation issue,

Again, your side is the only one who seems to be attaching salvation to the issue of origins.  Christ is clear that acceptance of His sacrifice is the basis of salvation.  We will be judged by our actions, however.  Do we want to explain to Christ why we told people that the miracles of God were fake because supernatural miracles are contrary to sense or reason... or science?

 

[Retrobyter]

11 hours ago, Scott Free said:

The ancient Hebrew view of creation you must offer to be consistent with Bible teaching as the literal interpretation dictates. A sound doctrine would not to pick and choose. Leaving it all out causes doubt on the validity of this approach. The Gospel of Jesus does not need extraneous information added to it.

 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." 2 Timothy 3:16-17

I do not see the part where scripture is for learning natural theology to equip for works of contention.

Shalom, Scott Free.

If you think this "nifty" diagram represents what the ancients TRULY believed about these issues, then you've been LIED TO! I don't know who came up with this pretty little picture from Karbel Multimedia, but it is FULL OF ERRORS! It is NOT what the ancient Hebrew-speaking people believed! The truth is that this is a picture of what SOME PEOPLE THINK the ancient Hebrew-speaking people believed! And, they SAY it this way to PUT DOWN what they truly believed! It's just a way to belittle what was actually said in the Scriptures. It is the STRAWMAN argument against the Scriptures, by which God will judge the artist of this picture! It's disappointing to me that Logos Bible Software thought it valuable enough to copyright in 2012! That speaks VOLUMES to me about Logos!

One cannot build a case against "what the ancients believed" based upon any ENGLISH TRANLATION of things the translators were confused about!

For instance, the "ancients" did NOT believe in an "underworld!" "Sheol," or rather, "sh'owl," means "asked about." It refers to the questions children would ask at the gravesite of a loved one. This erroneous concept of an "underworld" comes from the GREEK influence on the theologians, whether Jewish or Christian! It's that idea that there's a "Hades" as a place of the dead, which comes from Greek mythology. And, attached to that concept is the idea that "Satan" as the god "Hades" is the RULER of this "underworld!" That's not even CLOSE to reality! HaSatan (Hebrew for "the Enemy") FEARS the Lake of Fire into which he will be thrown one day! And, as far as an "underworld" is concerned, he is merely trying to deceive as many people as he can and make them THINK he's on even footing with YHWH God, as though he was some sort of "Yin" to God's "Yang!" It's not even close to the truth!

The word "heaven" or rather "heavens" is a TRANSLATION word for the Hebrew word "shaamayim." The word means the "skies," and it is a DUAL word. In Hebrew, they have singular, plural, and DUAL for number. It is the place where the birds fly, where the clouds now form and produce weather, and it is where the "LIGHTS" (not the "sun," "moon," and "stars") were originally put.

It's NOT some "dome!" Again, that comes from those who HAD NO CLUE what the Hebrew words meant! They get this from another Hebrew word, "raqiya`." This word meant an "EXPANSE!" Someone THOUGHT it came from the Hebrew word meaning "to BEAT a metal thin," but it really meant "to beat a metal THIN!" and the thought behind the word was the THINNING of the air! Only gases EXPAND and THIN out to fill their container, which in this case is the ENTIRE ATMOSPHERE!

Read the Scriptures (and BELIEVE THEM AS WRITTEN)!

Genesis 1:6-8 (KJV)

6 And God said,

"Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters."

7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament "Heaven." And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Here's the Hebrew:

בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית

...

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֔ים יְהִ֥י רָקִ֖יעַ בְּתֹ֣וךְ הַמָּ֑יִם וִיהִ֣י מַבְדִּ֔יל בֵּ֥ין מַ֖יִם לָמָֽיִם׃
וַיַּ֣עַשׂ אֱלֹהִים֮ אֶת־הָרָקִיעַ֒ וַיַּבְדֵּ֗ל בֵּ֤ין הַמַּ֙יִם֙ אֲשֶׁר֙ מִתַּ֣חַת לָרָקִ֔יעַ וּבֵ֣ין הַמַּ֔יִם אֲשֶׁ֖ר מֵעַ֣ל לָרָקִ֑יעַ וַֽיְהִי־כֵֽן׃
וַיִּקְרָ֧א אֱלֹהִ֛ים לָֽרָקִ֖יעַ שָׁמָ֑יִם וַֽיְהִי־עֶ֥רֶב וַֽיְהִי־בֹ֖קֶר יֹ֥ום שֵׁנִֽי׃ פ

This transliterates to ...

Bree'shiyt 1:6-8

6 Vayyo'mer 'Elohiym yhiy raaqiya` btuwkh hammaayim viyhiy maVddiyl beeyn mayim laamaayim:
7 Vayya`as 'Elohiym 'et-haaraaqiya` vayyaVdeel beeyn hammayim 'asher mittachat laaraaqiya` uwVeeyn hammayim 'asher mee`al laaraaqiya` vaayhiy keen:
8 Vayyiqraa' 'Elohiym laaraaqiya` shaamaayim vayhiy-`ereV vayhiy-boqer yowm sheeniy: P

And, this translates to English word-for-word as ...

In-the-beginning 1:6-8

6 And-said God, "Let-there-be an-expanse in-middle of-the-waters and-let-it divide between waters from-waters":
7 And-made God [d.o.->]-the-expanse and-divided between the-waters that were-below to-the-expanse and-between the-waters that were-above to-the-expanse and-it-was so:
8 And-gave-a-name God to-the-expanse "Skies" and-it-was-evening and-it-was-morning, day two: [end of subtopic]

So, this was NOT a "dome"; it was an "EXPANSE" of gases with waters above the expanse and waters below the expanse. And, God called it "skies," a dual word for there was "evening" and there was "morning," appearing as two, very different skies.

This is just TWO of the topics that make this picture BOGUS!