Questions for evolution believers

[The Barbarian]

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Darwin proposed a single universal common progenitor from which all living things, plants and animals, evolved.  While he may have given lip service to the Creator, he certainly didn't give God credit for creating anything but one original life form. 

And the world He created to produce all the other taxa.    And Darwin wrote that it could have been a number of different forms.    Since he was not aware of genetics, he didn't have evidence that there was one common ancestor.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Darwin and all his little Darwinians have said ever after that the Bible is wrong

No, they point out that YE creationists are wrong.   You aren't God.   In fact, you can't be a YE creationist without rejecting the word of God.

You aren't here praising God and re-affirming the faith of others, you are here to attack the Bible and demean those who chose to believe it over the claims of YE creationists about our origins. 

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

You mention Jesus, but Jesus REVERED the Scriptures and used them to rebuke the devil.  He said that from the beginning GOD CREATED THEM male and female. 

I notice the Bible is very specific about what was there in the beginning.   Male and female were not, according to God.    Jesus was talking about the beginning or our race.   

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Which of us is calling Jesus a liar?  

I don't think you intend to call Him a liar.   You contradict Him, because you are in error.  YE creationists are, with few exceptions, not liars, but merely in error.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

If one believes in the written word of the Bible and they are in error, then the Bible must be in error, right?

But as you learned, YE creationists don't believe the Bible as written.    They are in error, not the Bible.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

How many mountain peaks are covered by a local flood?

In the case of the flood that created the Black Sea, an entire range of mountains.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

How does water cover the mountains when a relatively low lying ground with easy run-off to the sea is flooded?

When the mountains are in a basin, surrounded by higher ground.

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbooksite.elsevier.com%2FDPO%2Fgallery%2Fchs08%2Fs8_23a_full.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e3b71532269aeb2cd2cf92aa362b614a7019fffb7a87279abef6c0c64946fd0e&ipo=images

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

How does an ark float from the Middle East to the mountains in Turkey in a local flood?

You're confusing the modern "Mt. Ararat" with "the mountains of Ararat."    The present mountain was renamed relatively recently.   That's not where the Ark landed.

And God doesn't say the flood was in Mesopotamia.

3 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

God NEVER uses the most efficient way to do anything.  He chooses the impossible way.

Read the Bible.   He only does miracles to teach us things, not because He can't do things efficiently.    Most of nature, as in the case of evolution, works efficiently.    That's why engineers are starting to use God's methods; evolutionary processes work better than design for very complex problems.

God knew best, as usual.

 

[The Barbarian]

On 1/3/2024 at 7:08 PM, The Barbarian said:

Macroevolution is completely false with no evidence to support it. If macroevolution were true there would be an abundance of transitional fossils for us to observe, and there are none.

Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact.

YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise, Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms

11 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

I must admit I don't understand your post. I'm not sure what you are saying. Sorry.

I'm showing you that even YE creationists admit that there is an abundance of transitional fossils showing evidence for macroevolution.

 

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

13 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory. Creationists therefore need to accept this fact.

YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise, Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms

I'm showing you that even YE creationists admit that there is an abundance of transitional fossils showing evidence for macroevolution.

 

Can you give me specific examples of which creatures have been observed changing into other creatures?

And where specifically can I find this evidence?

[RV_Wizard]

There are certain things in the Bible you need to reject to believe in evolution.  In this case you have to decide which RELIGION you will follow, since evolution is more religion than science.  Here are some things you must reject.

The creation narrative.  Nothing found in the first two chapters in Genesis conform in any way with evolution.  You can take a few words out of context as some here do, but the totality of the creation narrative must be rejected.

The Fourth Commandment/ seven day week.  Days are determined by evening and morning.  Months are determined by the cycle of the moon.  A year is determined by the change of seasons; which we now know is caused by one orbit of the sun.  The seven day week  has connection only to the creation week and the day of rest.  God Himself carved the Fourth Commandment on a stone tablet which proclaimed that in six days He created the heaven, the earth, the seas and all that is in them.  He proclaimed the seventh day a holy day of rest.  

Human equality.  Because God made us all in His image, we are all equal in His eyes.  Evolution allowed certain people to conclude that some races were superior to other races.  Thus, we had the second world war, which was essentially a race war.  As may as 60,000,000 people died because of the belief in racial superiority due to more advanced evolution.  

Sin and death.  The Bible teaches that illness and death were brought into the world as the consequence of sin.  Evolution proponents believe that death happened for billions of years before man evolved.  Since death is not a consequence of sin then sin itself is no big deal.

Salvation.  Why would the Son of God come and die on the cross for the salvation of a specific species of animals when 99% of all the other species had already died off?  What would man need to be saved from anyway, if death was just a part of existence?  Why would there be any preclusion of killing someone and taking their things, when such an activity could eventually lead to more fit offspring?  There is only morality if there is a moral God for a compass.  There is only sin if there is a God to offend.  There is only a need for salvation if man is special in God's eyes and is worthy of saving.

The flood.  All evolution proponents lie about the great flood, saying that it never happened.  They and make up stories about a local flood that killed a lot of people and was sensationalized by bronze aged shepherds.  A global flood would create a bottleneck that evolution could not explain, so they have to argue that it never happened.  Fossils are on mountain peaks because of upshift.  

The credibility of the Bible.  Jesus taught that the Bible was inspired by God, and that it was worthy for instruction.  He never contradicted anything in the Scriptures, even though being eternal He was there are the time.  He memorized the Scriptures and quoted from them constantly.  He referred to the flood, to Jonah, and to Adam and Eve as if they were real people and real events.  While He taught in parables, He NEVER said the writings of Moses were anything but God inspired.  He told us to keep God's commandments; even number four, which without a six day creation has no meaning.  An evolutionist cannot revere the Bible as the inerrant word of God because it contradicts his preferred religion; evolution.

God created a perfect world, but man's rebellion brought upon it a curse.  To  the evolutionist, that never happened.  

 

[The Barbarian]

10 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

Can you give me specific examples of which creatures have been observed changing into other creatures?

If a creature were to change into another creature, evolutionary theory would be falsified.    Forget Pokemon.   Populations evolve, individuals do not.   But from your fellow creationist, Dr. Kurt Wise:

Evidences for Darwin’s second expectation — of stratomorphic intermediate species —include such species as Baragwanathia27 (between rhyniophytes and lycopods), Pikaia28 (between echinoderms and chordates), Purgatorius29 (between the tree shrews and the primates), and Proconsul30 (between the non-hominoid primates and the hominoids). Darwin’s third expectation —of higher-taxon stratomorphic intermediates — has been confirmed by such examples as the mammal-like reptile groups31 between the reptiles and the mammals, and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed ancestors. Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series — has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33 the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 the various mammal series of the Cenozoic37 (for example, the horse series, the camel series, the elephant series, the pig series, the titanothere series, etc.), the Cantius and Plesiadapus primate series,38 and the hominid series.

 

[The Barbarian]

4 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

There are certain things in the Bible you need to reject to believe in evolution.

No,there are certain things in  YE creationism that are inconsistent with evolution.   But that's a different issue.    In this case you have to decide whether to follow YE creationism or God's word, since creationism is man's revision of God's word. 

As you know, evolution is directly observed in living populations all around us.   Evolution is an observed phenomenon.    You seem to have confused the fact of evolution with common descent, which is a consequence of evolution.    As I showed you earlier, Darwin was not sure of common descent.    Until we discovered DNA, there was no way to confirm that fact.   But we now know it is a fact.   Would you like me to show you, again?

Obviously, God's word cannot be in contradiction to creation itself, if God is truthful.   So we can either assume God is not truthful, or conclude that YE creationism is an error.

4 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

The flood.  All evolution proponents lie about the great flood, saying that it never happened. 

No, that's a falsehood, too.    In fact, there's pretty good evidence for a great flood in the Middle East about the right time.    Since the Bible doesn't say the flood was worldwide, this might be the Flood of Noah.   Or it could be an allegory.   We don't actually know.

4 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

While He taught in parables, He NEVER said the writings of Moses were anything but God inspired. 

How do you figure His parables are not God-inspired?

Creationist students, listen to me very carefully: There is evidence for evolution, and evolution is an extremely successful scientific theory. That doesn't make it ultimately true, and it doesn't mean that there could not possibly be viable alternatives. It is my own faith choice to reject evolution, because I believe the Bible reveals true information about the history of the earth that is fundamentally incompatible with evolution. I am motivated to understand God's creation from what I believe to be a biblical, creationist perspective. Evolution itself is not flawed or without evidence. Please don't be duped into thinking that somehow evolution itself is a failure. Please don't idolize your own ability to reason.

YE Creationist Dr. Todd Wood   The Truth About Evolution

"Don't idolize your own ability to reason."   Let God be God and this won't bother you any longer.     Creationists aren't any less Christians than the rest of us; God doesn't care if you approve of it or not.   Focus on what He's telling you in the Bible.

[The Barbarian]

5 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Salvation.  Why would the Son of God come and die on the cross for the salvation of a specific species of animals when 99% of all the other species had already died off?

Because He gave man a living soul directly.    No other animals need salvation; they are innocent.

5 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Why would there be any preclusion of killing someone and taking their things, when such an activity could eventually lead to more fit offspring? 

It wouldn't.   Darwin explains why in The Descent of Man.   Darwinists have repeatedly shown why eugenic ideas, such as those proposed by creationists, are both morally objectionable and scientificially impossible.

Your new doctrines are merely errors, unless you idolize them and make them into a new religion.   Avoid that.   Your salvation depends on it.

 

[RV_Wizard]

7 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

As you know, evolution is directly observed in living populations all around us.   Evolution is an observed phenomenon.    You seem to have confused the fact of evolution with common descent, which is a consequence of evolution.

Therein lies the problem with evolution; it can't help but extrapolate truths into a lie.  We see animals ADAPT new characteristics to better exist within their environment, but we never see any animals evolve into a different animal.  Common descent, as Bible believing Christians know, stops 4,000 years ago at the ark.  All living things owe their ancestry to Noah's ark

7 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Obviously, God's word cannot be in contradiction to creation itself, if God is truthful.   So we can either assume God is not truthful, or conclude that YE creationism is an error.

Or we COULD conclude that evolution is a Satanic lie and its proponents, especially those who try to undermine the faith of other Christians, are actually doing the work of the devil... who they probably don't believe exists.

7 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Since the Bible doesn't say the flood was worldwide.

Genesis 7

19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:

22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

Once more, you claim the Bible does not say what it clearly says.  Do we need any more proof that evolution is just lies built upon lies?

7 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

How do you figure His parables are not God-inspired?

Jesus taught in parables.  Moses did not.

 

[The Barbarian]

As you know, evolution is directly observed in living populations all around us.   Evolution is an observed phenomenon.    You seem to have confused the fact of evolution with common descent, which is a consequence of evolution.

4 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Therein lies the problem with evolution; it can't help but extrapolate truths into a lie. 

You've gotten confused again.  Darwin said he didn't know if there was one common ancestor, or any number of ancestors.    Genetics has shown that there's a common ancestor of all living things on Earth today.    You're angry at genetics, not Darwinian theory.

4 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

We see animals ADAPT new characteristics to better exist within their environment

You've confused adaptation and evolution.   Not all adaptation is evolution, and not all evolution is adaptation.   Please take the time to learn the differences; you'll be much more effective here, if you do.

4 hours ago, RV_Wizard said:

Or we COULD conclude that evolution is a Satanic lie and its proponents, especially those who try to undermine the faith of other Christians, are actually doing the work of the devil

No one who understands the observed phenomenon of evolution would think it was a Satanic lie.    It's God's creation, after all.   I don't think you intend to undermine the faith of other Christians, but that's what YE creationism does.   It's a very effective atheist-maker.   Would you like me to show you, again?

Since the Bible doesn't say the flood was worldwide...

(presentation of scripture, none of which says the flood was worldwide)

I think you just made my point for me.   Thank you.  Once more, you claim the Bible says what it clearly does not.  Do we need any more proof that YE creationism is just man's revision of God's word?

 

 

[RV_Wizard]

8 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Genetics has shown that there's a common ancestor of all living things on Earth today.

No, it has shown biological commonality, which one would expect if all living things were created in the same place at the same time from the same elements by the same Creator using the same blueprint for life; and created with the ability to go forth and multiply.  You want to believe that it shows common descent because you revere evolution over the word of God.

8 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

You've confused adaptation and evolution.

Not at all.  Adaptation happens.  Evolution is your religion, and your reason for attacking the Bible on a Christian website.  God created adaptation.  Satan came up with the lie of evolution.

8 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

No one who understands the observed phenomenon of evolution would think it was a Satanic lie.

Nazi's didn't think the master race was a Satanic lie.  Muslims don't believe Islam is a Satanic lie.  Mormons don't believe their religion is a Satanic lie, nor do Buddhists, Jehovah's Witnesses, or any other religion.  Jesus warned that there would be many false teachers and false prophets to follow, and it has come to pass.  Any believe that takes you away from the word of God is Satanic in origin.

8 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

 I don't think you intend to undermine the faith of other Christians

I'm not on a Christian website trying to convince Christians that their Bible is wrong, the earth is billions of years old, Adam's actions were inconsequential, Noah was just a dude with a big boat and God pretty much ignored His creation for billions of years. 

8 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Since the Bible doesn't say the flood was worldwide

What part, specifically, of the flood narrative makes you think it was local?  Was it the  part where everything on earth that breathed air died except those on the ark, or that all the mountains were covered with water?  Do you watch action movies and tell everyone they were romantic comedies?  How exactly can anyone read those words and conclude it was a local flood???