The Problem With Evolution Part 2- Animals

[RV_Wizard]

2 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

Since Jesus made no comment on how old the Earth is, we can know that He did not consider it of any importance to His ministry to us.

We don't know everything He said, we only know what was recorded.  We know that He is recorded to have always quoted the Scriptures and to never contradict them.  He also said, if you didn't believe Moses you won't believe me; for He wrote of me.  You don't believe what Moses wrote.  That's on you.

[FreeGrace]

On 1/11/2024 at 10:09 AM, RV_Wizard said:

We don't know everything He said, we only know what was recorded.  We know that He is recorded to have always quoted the Scriptures and to never contradict them.  He also said, if you didn't believe Moses you won't believe me; for He wrote of me.  You don't believe what Moses wrote.  That's on you.

Well, that's on you too!  For I have shown the meaning of the words of Gen 1:2, which Moses wrote, and you clearly prefer any English translation (mis-) rather than what Moses actually wrote.

"Tohu wabohu" means the SAME THING in Gen 1:2 as it does in Jer 4:23 and isa 34:11.

[FreeGrace]

On 1/11/2024 at 9:53 AM, RV_Wizard said:

Yes, unschooled does not equal uneducated.  He knows the Scriptures cold and quoted from them many times.  Had there been long ages coded in, He would have shared that with His disciples.

If God wanted mankind to give any details of what happened between v.1 and v.2, He would have told us somewhere within the collection of books.  

So there is no reason to assume that Jesus would have shared what already has been written, which is that the earth became an uninhabitable wasteland.  That is what Moses wrote.  

Go to biblehub.com and to your own research.  That's what you will find.  See how "tohu" is translated EVERYWHERE else in the OT.  

btw, the ONLY WAY "formless" has any meaning is when a form is compared to other forms with an expected specific form.  So if a certain object doesn't match the usual expectations of the form for that category of objects, it could be called formless.

 I already gave an example of this, but I don't recall you ever acknowledged it.

We all have a "usual expectation" of what the "female form" looks like.  Right?

So, a tall skinny female (flat chested) can be called "formless" because her form doesn't fit the usual "female form".  

But, she STILL has a form.  And they are familiar to most, if not all of us.  She would be described as being a "beanpole" which clearly HAS a form, or even "broomstick", which also has a form.

So, I repeat, there are NO objects that are literally without form, so the English translation of v.2 is bogus through and through.

There would have to be a contextual reason for calling an object (earth) formless, and that would mean comparing it to other planets, which the Bible didn't do.

So it is way obvious that the earth wasn't EVER formless.  Because there is no such thing.  He created a perfect planet which BECAME a wasteland that was uninhabitable.

And He didn't give us any details of HOW or WHY the planet became that way.

I have no doubt that when we step into eternity, such details will be readily available.

[RV_Wizard]

9 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

So, I repeat, there are NO objects that are literally without form, so the English translation of v.2 is bogus through and through.

Formless:  lacking a definite or regular form or shape; shapeless.

Los Angeles is vast and practically formless, a city so unlike any other that it can hardly be called a city at all.

LOS ANGELES: “A HUMMING, SMOKING, EVER-CHANGING CONTRAPTION” | COLIN MARSHALL | APRIL 28, 2021 | MIT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW

The market for meat alternatives is booming, but so far most products are only able to replicate the formless ground meat found in burgers, sausages, and nuggets.

AN ISRAELI STARTUP IS 3D PRINTING CULTURED RIBEYE STEAKS | EDD GENT | FEBRUARY 17, 2021 | SINGULARITY HUB 

In the beginning, the earth was a formless void, and darkness covered the face of the deep, according to Genesis.

THE BACKSTORY OF ‘NOAH’ IS FULL OF GIANTS, HORNY ANGELS, AND A GRIEVING GOD | TIM TOWNSEND | MARCH 28, 2014 | THE DAILY BEAST

And so we are presented with a picture so incomplete as to be virtually formless.

WHY HARRY REID’S MORMON SLUR MAY BE GOOD FOR THE CHURCH | MICHELLE COTTLE | SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 | THE DAILY BEAST

Relatively misshapen and formless, the dorsal figure is perhaps even more expressive of physical torment.

THE SHROUD OF TURIN AND THOMAS DE WESSELOW’S ‘THE SIGN.’ | THOMAS DE WESSELOW | APRIL 3, 2012 | THE DAILY BEAST

It turns out that the act of creation is profoundly transformative, even for a formless, timeless, all-powerful primogenitor.

3 MUST READS: ‘KAYAK MORNING,’ ‘MR. G,’ AND ‘ALEX GILVARRY’ | HILLARY KELLY, MYTHILI RAO, JACOB SILVERMAN | FEBRUARY 8, 2012 | THE DAILY BEAST

It was almost formless, its outlines seeming to melt into the gloom.

THE GIRL AND THE BILL | BANNISTER MERWIN

Solids (substances that exist in the solid-state) have definite shapes and occupy fixed volumes. 
Liquids (substances that exist in the liquid state) do not have definite shapes, but they occupy fixed volumes. They occupy the shape of their containers and are slightly compressible.
Gases (substances that exist in the gaseous state) do not have any definite shapes and do not occupy fixed volumes. Gaseous substances occupy the shape of their container and are highly compressible.  source

I realize you have a problem with the English language, but it might be a good idea to learn it.

 

[FreeGrace]

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said: 

So, I repeat, there are NO objects that are literally without form, so the English translation of v.2 is bogus through and through.

Formless:  lacking a definite or regular form or shape; shapeless.

So then, apply THAT to creation of the earth.  Did God create a crooked earth, a lop-sided earth, or what?  

I have already explained that what can be SEEN HAS a form, and it doesn't matter if it is irregular, etc.  I even gave an example of how "formless" can be used legitimately.

But all this talk about "form" is silly, because we KNOW what "tohu" means in Jer 4:23 and Isa 34:11 after the land has been totally destroyed.  

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Los Angeles is vast and practically formless, a city so unlike any other that it can hardly be called a city at all.

Actually, it HAS form.  Which is called "sprawling".  And everyone understand what that looks like.  And "practically" doesn't mean totally formless, so you are supporting my argument.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

LOS ANGELES: “A HUMMING, SMOKING, EVER-CHANGING CONTRAPTION” | COLIN MARSHALL | APRIL 28, 2021 | MIT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW

The market for meat alternatives is booming, but so far most products are only able to replicate the formless ground meat found in burgers, sausages, and nuggets.

So you are forced to quote silly comments by people who don't know how to use correct words, huh?  All the meat found in burgers are ROUND and thin.  How is that NOT a form?  And sausages?  Don't get me started.  same for nuggets.

All of these have a form, regardless of various opinions.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

AN ISRAELI STARTUP IS 3D PRINTING CULTURED RIBEYE STEAKS | EDD GENT | FEBRUARY 17, 2021 | SINGULARITY HUB 

And this has nothing to do with anything.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

In the beginning, the earth was a formless void, and darkness covered the face of the deep, according to Genesis.

No it wasn't.  In the beginning, God CREATED (bara) the earth.  And we know that He spoke it into existence.  Why would anyone think that God would speak the earth into its present form in stages, when He could speak the FINAL FORM into existence in one breath.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

THE BACKSTORY OF ‘NOAH’ IS FULL OF GIANTS, HORNY ANGELS, AND A GRIEVING GOD | TIM TOWNSEND | MARCH 28, 2014 | THE DAILY BEAST

More irrelevancy.  ??

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

And so we are presented with a picture so incomplete as to be virtually formless.

No, to be formless is to be invisible.  Unless you are speaking of an object like the example I already gave.  Formlessness only has meaning with an object that lacks the USUAL and CUSTOMARY forms associated with like objects.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

WHY HARRY REID’S MORMON SLUR MAY BE GOOD FOR THE CHURCH | MICHELLE COTTLE | SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 | THE DAILY BEAST

Huh?

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Relatively misshapen and formless, the dorsal figure is perhaps even more expressive of physical torment.

This is a huge contradiction.  To be "misshapen" actually refers to a FORM.  So does "figure".  Thank you for supporting my argument.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

THE SHROUD OF TURIN AND THOMAS DE WESSELOW’S ‘THE SIGN.’ | THOMAS DE WESSELOW | APRIL 3, 2012 | THE DAILY BEAST

WITW?

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

It turns out that the act of creation is profoundly transformative, even for a formless, timeless, all-powerful primogenitor.

And we KNOW why the "all-powerful primogenitor" is formless.  He is a Spirit, and therefore, formless.  Thank you again for supporting my argument.

And God speaks the universe into existence.  There is no evidence that He did it in stages.  What He did in Genesis 1 is to decorate the planet.  That doesn't change its shape or form.  No more than a naked Christmas tree compares to a decorated one.  The ornaments do NOT provide 'form' or 'shape' to the tree.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

3 MUST READS: ‘KAYAK MORNING,’ ‘MR. G,’ AND ‘ALEX GILVARRY’ | HILLARY KELLY, MYTHILI RAO, JACOB SILVERMAN | FEBRUARY 8, 2012 | THE DAILY BEAST

??

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

It was almost formless, its outlines seeming to melt into the gloom.

Thank you AGAIN for supporting my argument.  The words "almost formless" ALSO means the object HAS form.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

THE GIRL AND THE BILL | BANNISTER MERWIN

So what?

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Solids (substances that exist in the solid-state) have definite shapes and occupy fixed volumes. 
Liquids (substances that exist in the liquid state) do not have definite shapes, but they occupy fixed volumes. They occupy the shape of their containers and are slightly compressible.
Gases (substances that exist in the gaseous state) do not have any definite shapes and do not occupy fixed volumes. Gaseous substances occupy the shape of their container and are highly compressible.  source

Even liquids have shape or form.  "do not have definie shapes" ALSO have shapes.  They just aren't 'definite'.  But they HAVE shape.

11 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

I realize you have a problem with the English language, but it might be a good idea to learn it.

Actually, the problem with understanding words is on you, all the way.

And thanks again for all your support of my argument.

The harder you try, the MORE you support my argument.  This post is a classic!

Edited January 14 by FreeGrace