The Problem With Evolution Part 2- Animals

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, Mozart's Starling said:

Can you address the 4th commandment argument? Why does it clearly indicate a literal 7 days being the case in Genesis?

As you see, it doesn't.  Repeating an allegory doesn't convert it to a literal history.

 

[teddyv]

1 hour ago, Mozart's Starling said:

Can you address the 4th commandment argument? Why does it clearly indicate a literal 7 days being the case in Genesis? You realize if you can't your "7 days=actually millions of years" argument is COMPLETELY destroyed right? Explain.

Nice red herring. Why don't you address your fallacious arguments instead of committing more?

[Mozart's Starling]

For the sake of civility I'll drop out now. Not gonna waste anymore time on it. Goodbye.

Edited December 8, 2023 by Mozart's Starling

[RV_Wizard]

49 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

You really damage your credibility by making up things you want me to believe or not believe.

Do you even know who Adam was?

Adam was the first human being.  He was created by God from the dust of the earth on the sixth day of creation.  Eve was taken from his rib.  Neither of them had parents.  Neither of them evolved from anything.  Adam is proof of God's special creation.  You either do not believe that, or you're just typing words.  You claim that humans and hummingbirds share a common ancestor, which is absolute foolishness.  Nothing you claim about the Bible is true.  All of it could be disproved by anyone capable of reading it.  

 

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, RV_Wizard said:

Adam was the first human being.  He was created by God from the dust of the earth on the sixth day of creation.  Eve was taken from his rib.  Neither of them had parents.  Neither of them evolved from anything.  Adam is proof of God's special creation.  You either do not believe that, or you're just typing words.  You claim that humans and hummingbirds share a common ancestor, which is absolute foolishness.  Nothing you claim about the Bible is true.  All of it could be disproved by anyone capable of reading it.  

I get that you've assumed that your interpretation of God's word is God's word.   So do we all.   The danger is in making your interpretation an idol that defines "who believes God's word."    He won't send you to hell for being a creationist; he doesn't care what you think about that.   He does care that you worship Him and not your own reasoning. 

In the end, your salvation depends on that.

 

[The Barbarian]

2 hours ago, Mozart's Starling said:

For the sake of civility I'll drop out now. Not gonna waste anymore time on it. Goodbye.

Probably a good idea for us all.

 

[FreeGrace]

20 hours ago, teddyv said:

Sure, but the argument you seem to be advancing is not supported by the Biblical narrative. There is no Sun, Moon or stars until Day 4. Days 1-3 is only a description of an ethereal "light" separated from the "dark". While evening and morning are used in the text, the Hebrew definition of those concepts are predicated on the Sun being present. The creation account language is borrowing familiar concepts and imagery and applying them as a rhythm or pattern of the Creation story. I see no need to assume a hard literal application of the language, especially in our present culture shaped by Modernity and rationalism.

I was just showing Barbarian that even with a sun, it isn't always visible in the morning.  That's all.   

[FreeGrace]

17 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

FreeGrace said: 

In fact, there was fall out across the country as far as to the Dakotas, at least.

We had fallout from Mt St Helens in Michigan.

That's why I said "at least".  Way back then, I saw the coverage over the States, and it went pretty far.  Probably states east of MI got some of that "snow" too.  

[FreeGrace]

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

No.   It means that mammals and frogs had a last common ancestor a long time before, (for example) mammals and birds had a last common ancestor.

What do you mean "a long time before"?  How long between those animals and humans, do you think?

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

   And we can test this with organisms of known descent, so we know it works.

All you are doing is contradicting 1 Cor 15:39.  The Bible states that "all flesh is not the same".  And then it differentiates between animals, humans, fish and birds.  Maybe you don't understand what that means.

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

I did, several times.    The Bible speaks of mornings and evenings before there was a sun to have them.   By definition, a sun is needed.   So the text itself tells us that it's not a literal history.

By understanding that "a morning and evening" means a 24 hour day, we don't need no stinkin' sun.  We understand time.  And God was making the point about the time He took to prepare earth for man.  That is a restoration or me, but it can also be the creation for others.  Makes no difference.

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

See the map.   

Parts of Eastern Washington did.  Others got maybe 1/2 inch or less.  Large parts of Washington got nothing detectable.  Very limited areas got up to 5 inches downwind of the volcano.   It spread less than usual with Plinian eruptions, since they typically blast upward and huge amounts go very high into the stratosphere.   In this case, the blast was horizontal and the ash didn't get spread as far or in multiple directions.

How do we know if this is the entire fall out, or just in the early part of the eruption?

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

I notice that no one can show that happened anywhere but within a few miles of the volcano.

It seems rather obvious that the map you included showed very much more than just "a few miles of the volcano".  

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

What do you mean "a long time before"?  How long between those animals and humans, do you think?

Frogs, of course, evolved a long, long time after the common ancestor of amphibians and amniotes (tetrapods, other than amphibians).    Tens of millions of years at least.    The closest we have for the last common ancestor of frogs and other amphibians...

Frogamander:
Their phylogenetic analyses confirmed that Gerobatrachus was an amphibamid temnospondyl, and since all modern amphibians nested within Lepospondyli, it was positioned far from the ancestry of frogs and salamanders.^[4][5] A 2012 study of the stem-caecilian Eocaecilia found Gerobatrachus to group within Lissamphibia. In this phylogeny, Gerobatrachus is more closely related to frogs and salamanders than it is to caecilians, meaning that Gerobatrachus would have been a descendant of the last common ancestor of modern amphibians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerobatrachus

Modern frogs are, of course much more recent.    But the point is that ambibians comprise a different branch on the bush; mammals didn't evolve from frogs.

DNA shows how long ago we had a common ancestor.   And we can test this with organisms of known descent, so we know it works.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

All you are doing is contradicting 1 Cor 15:39.  The Bible states that "all flesh is not the same".

Since the common descent is demonstrably true. 1 Corinthians confirms DNA analysis, showing differences between major taxa as a result of common descent.   

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

 And then it differentiates between animals, humans, fish and birds

Except when the Bible says bats are birds.    It's a bad idea to try to graft too much of your ideas into scripture.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

By understanding that "a morning and evening" means a 24 hour day, we don't need no stinkin' sun.

By definition, we do.   This is one way we know that Gen. 1 and 2 are not literal histories.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

How do we know if this is the entire fall out, or just in the early part of the eruption?

That was the final determination by USGS.    I notice that no one can show that the sun was completely obscured anywhere but within a few miles of the volcano.

1 hour ago, FreeGrace said:

It seems rather obvious that the map you included showed very much more than just "a few miles of the volcano".  

But a few centimeters of ash falling from winds does not mean the sun was obscured.    That never happened except very close to the eruption where the clouds were actually thick enough.   By the next morning, the morning light was there even at Mt. St. Helens.