The age of the world according to Protestants

[Rickzee]

Even your source of misinformation, Answers in Genesis, recognizes that those “human footprints” are actually dinosaur tracks.

answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

Peace

Tim

What it actually says is:
“Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed.”

Some prominent creationist promoters of these tracks have long since withdrawn their support. Some of the allegedly human tracks may be artifacts of erosion of dinosaur tracks obscuring the claw marks. There is a need for properly documented research on the tracks before we would use them to argue the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. However, there is much other evidence that dinosaurs and humans coexisted—see Q&A: Dinosaurs.

What I said was that I had personally gone to Paluxy and had personally, as a tracker of humans, concluded that some of the tracks were in fact, quite human. I also stated that I am not infallible, and neither are any of us.

I was drawn to this forum by the title “why do …”
If the real purpose is to UNDERSTAND why someone believes something, then it is counterproductive to degrade the exchange with belittling remarks.

YOUR experts and indoctrination may differ from MY experts and indoctrination; however that does not mean that:
I am ignorant or uniformed.
That quoted sources are any less credible or well educated.

In truth, this debate has been going on for a long time. The vociferous attacks against Christianity in general and creationists in particular is rooted more in the consequences of the world views expressed than in the disagreement over interpretation of rocks.

If the world is billions of years old
If there were billions of years of death, disease, and suffering BEFORE Original sin.
Then, the atheists are correct and so was Darwin.
There is no need for a Savior, no such thing as “sin” and it is truly “survival of the fittest.”

You are, according to evolutionary HYPOTHESIS, nothing more than the product of two random ROCKS, somehow in defiance of all known science, who somehow created a protein which is known to be unstable, and in defiance of all known science increased its informational base and simultaneously developed a “language” to interpret that information, and then against all known science began, NOT to duplicate itself but to create a multitude of informational systems all greater than their ancestors and all capable of INCREASING in informational ability.

The odds of this happening have been calculated. The resulting number is, according science, a number greater than the estimated number of atoms in the known universe. In other words it is impossible. This problem is recognized by many evolutionists. Carl Sagan tried to solve the problem with “pan-spermia” that life was “seeded” here from ??? somewhere. Which simply moves the question to a new location and solves nothing.

On the other hand, if the Bible is truly the word of God, then, while not a book of science, when it deals with science it deals correctly.

Example:
IF Noah’s flood actually happened AS THE BIBLE TEACHES IT. We would expect to find “billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the world.”

SCIENCE:
what do we find when we examine the geological structure of the planet?

Billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the world.

SPECULATION:
Interpret that data from an atheistic, naturalistic world-view.

Interpret that data from a biblical world-view.

If you disagree with a nodeathbeforethefall6daycreationist view at least be honest and state your presuppositions.

If you disagree I expect that you will find “experts” to support your and their presuppositions and world-view.

If you agree then you will find “experts” to support that view.

The original “big-bang” theory goes all the way back to and past the Epicurians (a self-existent universe) Most New-Age
The original “darwinian” evolution goes all the back to and past the Stoics. (everything is “god” is everything) Pantheism

Original Christianity goes back to and past that moment in time when:

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

May God bless you in your search for Him.

Rickzee <><

 

[Rickzee]

according to evolutionary HYPOTHESIS, nothing more than the product of two random ROCKS, somehow in defiance of all known science, who somehow created a protein which is known to be unstable, and in defiance of all known science increased its informational base and simultaneously developed a “language” to interpret that information, and then against all known science began, NOT to duplicate itself but to create a multitude of informational systems all greater than their ancestors and all capable of INCREASING in informational ability.

Sorry, I forgot to post this in the previous.

Great book by a Catholic scientist
“Darwin’s Black Box” Michael J. Behe, The Free Press, 1996 ISBN 0-684-83493-6
christianbook.com/Christian/Books/easy_find?Ntk=isbn&Ntt=0-684-83493-6&action=Search&N=0&Ne=0&event=ESRCN&nav_search=1&cms=1&Go.x=14&Go.y=15&Go=Go

The book that started the modern creationist movement;
“The Genesis Flood”, Whitcomb & Morris, P&R Publishing 1989, ISBN 0-87552-338-2
christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?item_no=5523382&netp_id=112666&event=ESRCN&item_code=WW

Dominus Vobiscum

 

[lak611]

On the other hand, if the Bible is truly the word of God, then, while not a book of science, when it deals with science it deals correctly.

Example:
IF Noah’s flood actually happened AS THE BIBLE TEACHES IT. We would expect to find “billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the world.”

SCIENCE:
what do we find when we examine the geological structure of the planet?

Billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the world.

This is true. There is no evidence from science to show that the flood did not happen. The evidence in the rocks shows that there was a catastrophic event that killed all these things. The mountains and rivers in the terrain of the earth also would have come into being after all that water started to recede. The Bible is straightforward on all of the events of creation and early civilizations. God inspired the human writers of the Bible, so there isn’t anything in it that is not true. God cannot lie, especially not in His Word.

 

[Orogeny]

What it actually says is:
“Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed.”

Some prominent creationist promoters of these tracks have long since withdrawn their support. Some of the allegedly human tracks may be artifacts of erosion of dinosaur tracks obscuring the claw marks. There is a need for properly documented research on the tracks before we would use them to argue the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs. However, there is much other evidence that dinosaurs and humans coexisted—see Q&A: Dinosaurs.

Yep. In the section titled “Arguments we think creationists should NOT use”. Seems to me that they are admitting that the tracks at Dinosaur Valley SP are dinosaur, not human.

What I said was that I had personally gone to Paluxy and had personally, as a tracker of humans, concluded that some of the tracks were in fact, quite human. I also stated that I am not infallible, and neither are any of us.

How often, other than your trip to the state park, have you found human tracks in rock? How often have you tracked dinosaurs? How familiar are you with the structure of dinosaur feet? Experts in both fields agree that the tracks are of dinosaur origin.

If the world is billions of years old
If there were billions of years of death, disease, and suffering BEFORE Original sin.
Then, the atheists are correct and so was Darwin.
There is no need for a Savior, no such thing as “sin” and it is truly “survival of the fittest.”

I pity your sense of faith. There were billions of years of death, disease and suffering before original sin. And guess what? There was a Saviour! He came and died for me just as much as He did for you. Acceptance of the FACTS has no bearing on my faith. Pity it does yours.

You are, according to evolutionary HYPOTHESIS, nothing more than the product of two random ROCKS, somehow in defiance of all known science, who somehow created a protein which is known to be unstable, and in defiance of all known science increased its informational base and simultaneously developed a “language” to interpret that information, and then against all known science began, NOT to duplicate itself but to create a multitude of informational systems all greater than their ancestors and all capable of INCREASING in informational ability.

You are, according to your post, misinformed as to what evolution is and claims.

The odds of this happening have been calculated. The resulting number is, according science, a number greater than the estimated number of atoms in the known universe. In other words it is impossible. This problem is recognized by many evolutionists. Carl Sagan tried to solve the problem with “pan-spermia” that life was “seeded” here from ??? somewhere. Which simply moves the question to a new location and solves nothing.

You are confusing abiogenesis with evolution. Two different things.

On the other hand, if the Bible is truly the word of God, then, while not a book of science, when it deals with science it deals correctly.

You and I would agree on that.

Example:
IF Noah’s flood actually happened AS THE BIBLE TEACHES IT. We would expect to find “billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the world.”

SCIENCE:
what do we find when we examine the geological structure of the planet?

Billions of dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the world.

A little education in sedimentary geology, stratigraphy and paleontology would help you avoid this mistake. There is no, repeat, no evidence in the geologic record for a world-wide flood. That is not just an interpretation. That is a fact. Only if you don’t understand basic geology would you make that mistake.

If you disagree with a nodeathbeforethefall6daycreationist view at least be honest and state your presuppositions.

I don’t agree with it and I don’t think I have been hiding that.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Great book by a Catholic scientist
“Darwin’s Black Box” Michael J. Behe, The Free Press, 1996 ISBN 0-684-83493-6
christianbook.com/Christian/Books/easy_find?Ntk=isbn&Ntt=0-684-83493-6&action=Search&N=0&Ne=0&event=ESRCN&nav_search=1&cms=1&Go.x=14&Go.y=15&Go=Go

And a better book by a Catholic scientist “Finding Darwin’s God”, Kenneth Miller
amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0060930497

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

This is true. There is no evidence from science to show that the flood did not happen. The evidence in the rocks shows that there was a catastrophic event that killed all these things. The mountains and rivers in the terrain of the earth also would have come into being after all that water started to recede. The Bible is straightforward on all of the events of creation and early civilizations. God inspired the human writers of the Bible, so there isn’t anything in it that is not true. God cannot lie, especially not in His Word.

Which geology class did you learn this stuff in? Which ever it was, you need to demand your money back!!!

Peace

Tim

 

[Rickzee]

Yep. …Experts in both fields agree that the tracks are of dinosaur origin.

Actually it says there is uncertainty. They do not agree.

I pity your sense of faith.

I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior in 1976. My life story has been shown on television (about 8 times) explaining how Jesus transformed my life. My allegience therefore is to Jesus Christ. Not to any church or denomination but to Him, and Him alone. My Jesus speaks of Adam and Eve as real historical people, of the flood, etc. to Him the scripture is historical and accurate. I’ll stick with Him.

You are confusing abiogenesis with evolution. Two different things.

Sorry but YOU are mistaken. Life from non-life is the basis for evolution. The demand for enough time for life to evolve is the driving force behind the need to interpret the earth as “old.” The emerging “Intelligent Design” movement has arisen exactly because of this. The circular reasoning of evolution/old earth adherents is becoming evident hence the distress as they are exposed like the “emperor has no clothes.”

Behe’s irreducible complexity is a direct response to Darwin’s statement that:

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possible have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

The estimated time required to randomly construct a single simple protein would be:
15 billion years (current estimate of age of universe)
times 10 to the sixtieth power.
you still would not have life since simple life needs @ 200 different proteins. Irreducible complexity.

Dean Kenyon, whose book “Biochemical Predestination” was used for years has withdrawn his entire support for his own work and it was because of a STUDENT who asked “how could the first proteins have been constructed without genetic instructions?” He could not answer.

A little education in sedimentary geology, stratigraphy and paleontology would help you avoid this mistake. There is no, repeat, no evidence in the geologic record for a world-wide flood. That is not just an interpretation. That is a fact. Only if you don’t understand basic geology would you make that mistake.I don’t agree with it and I don’t think I have been hiding that.

The implication for geology is that if life could not have arisen even in an infinitely longer time than anyone is willing to give the universe, then, the INTERPRETATION of the evidence (rocks) giving long ages may be erroneous “fact.” In FACT, the observations of canyon building, etc. at Mt. Saint Helens showed how quickly formations that would have been estimated to be eons old, were in FACT created in hours or days. This was OBSERVABLE science as opposed to interpretation of the present to fit a “presupposed” past.

Whitcomb & Morris’s “The Genesis Flood” *(link in previous post) *gives abundant evidence supporting a world-wide flood, and much more has been written in support since then.

Werner Gitt’s book “In The Beginning Was Information” might help you to understand the implications of information theory and what it does to the whole concept of evolution.
christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?item_no=514615&netp_id=446696&event=ESRCN&item_code=WW

Continued …

 

[Rickzee]

Page 2

The following quotes are from supporters of YOUR view! Fascinating.

‘The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that “a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein”.’
Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University) as quoted in ‘Hoyle on Evolution’. Nature, Vol. 294, 12 November 1981, p. 105

“The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radiodecay rates of uranium and thorium. Such “confirmation” may be short lived as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily. There has been in recent years the horrible realizatioon that radiodecay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences
And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events which brought the Mesozoic to a close may not be 65 million years ago but, rather, within the age and memory of man”

Frederick B. Jueneman, FAIC, ‘Secular catastrophism’ Industrial Research and Development, June 1982, p. 21

‘These results indicate that total-rock systems may be open during metamorphism and may have their isotropic systems changed, making it impossible to determine their geologic age.’

Prof. Gunter Faure (Dept of Geology, Ohio State Univ.) and Prof. James L. Powell (Dept. of Geology, Oberlin College) in Strontium Isotope Geology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin and New York, 1972, p.102

‘Carbon 14 contents as low as 3.3 +/- 0.2 percent modern (apparent age 27,000 years) measured from the shells of snails Melanoides tuberculatus living in artesian springs in southern Nevada are attributed to fixation of dissolved HCO3 with which the shells are in carbon isotope equilibrium.’
[Ed. note: In other words, these living snails ‘died’ 27,000 years ago.]

Dr Alan C. Riggs (formerly of the U.S. Geological Survey, now on the staff of the University of Washington, Seattle), ‘Major carbon 14 deficiency in modern snail shells from southern Nevada springs’, Science, Vol. 224, 6 April 1984, p. 58.

‘The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply, feeling that explanations are not worth the trouble as long as the work bring results. This is supposed to be hard-headed pragmatism.’

J. E. O’Rourke, ‘Pragmatism versus materialism in stratigraphy’. American Journal of Science, vol 276, January 1976, p. 47

Finally,
The gospel of John Chapter 1, verses 1-3
Joh 1:1 εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
Joh 1:2 ουτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον
Joh 1:3 παντα δι αυτου εγενετο και χωρις αυτου εγενετο ουδε εν ο γεγονεν

this is the original so we won’t argue about translation.

it says that Jesus was the agent of creation, that He made (ex nihilo) all that is created.

My Jesus made a perfect world, man, in Adam, caused it all to be cursed.

Your Jesus, created death disease, evil and bloodshed for millions or billions of years in a survival of the fittest plan.

I think I’ll stick with the Jesus of the Bible.

Rick <><

 

[lak611]

Page 2

Finally,
The gospel of John Chapter 1, verses 1-3
Joh 1:1 εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος
Joh 1:2 ουτος ην εν αρχη προς τον θεον
Joh 1:3 παντα δι αυτου εγενετο και χωρις αυτου εγενετο ουδε εν ο γεγονεν

this is the original so we won’t argue about translation.

it says that Jesus was the agent of creation, that He made (ex nihilo) all that is created.

My Jesus made a perfect world, man, in Adam, caused it all to be cursed.

Your Jesus, created death disease, evil and bloodshed for millions or billions of years in a survival of the fittest plan.

I think I’ll stick with the Jesus of the Bible.

Rick <><

I’ll stick with the Jesus of the Bible too! And I am a Catholic with a B.S. in Biology.

 

[Orogeny]

Actually it says there is uncertainty. They do not agree.

Actually, they do agree. That is why it is in their “Arguments creationists should NOT use” section.

I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior in 1976.

Great. I accepted Jesus when I was baptized in 1961.

My life story has been shown on television (about 8 times) explaining how Jesus transformed my life. My allegience therefore is to Jesus Christ. Not to any church or denomination but to Him, and Him alone. My Jesus speaks of Adam and Eve as real historical people, of the flood, etc. to Him the scripture is historical and accurate. I’ll stick with Him.

My allegence is to Jesus also. I don’t doubt the evidence His nature has left and the intelligence He gave us to interpret that evidence, that the earth is ~4.6 billion years old and life evolved.

Sorry but YOU are mistaken. Life from non-life is the basis for evolution.

Wrong. You need to take a basic science class, pal. How life started is irrelevant to evolution. Evolution describes the change in life over time, not how it started.

The demand for enough time for life to evolve is the driving force behind the need to interpret the earth as “old.”

You really don’t know anything about geology, do you? Try making that argument with a metamorphic petrologist.

The emerging “Intelligent Design” movement has arisen exactly because of this. The circular reasoning of evolution/old earth adherents is becoming evident hence the distress as they are exposed like the “emperor has no clothes.”

Wrong again. ID has arisen because the courts have ruled that creationism can’t be taught in public schools. ID is the attempt to make creationism a science so that it could be taught in school.

Behe’s irreducible complexity is a direct response to Darwin’s statement that:

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possible have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

Yep, and so far he has failed to find one single irreducibly complex organ. See “Finding Darwin’s God” that I referenced before.

The estimated time required to randomly construct a single simple protein would be:
15 billion years (current estimate of age of universe)
times 10 to the sixtieth power.
you still would not have life since simple life needs @ 200 different proteins. Irreducible complexity.

Citation, please. Also, that is not irreducible complexity. You don’t even have your YEC terms right.

Dean Kenyon, whose book “Biochemical Predestination” was used for years has withdrawn his entire support for his own work and it was because of a STUDENT who asked “how could the first proteins have been constructed without genetic instructions?” He could not answer.

Citation, please.

(continued)

 

[Orogeny]

The implication for geology is that if life could not have arisen even in an infinitely longer time than anyone is willing to give the universe, then, the INTERPRETATION of the evidence (rocks) giving long ages may be erroneous “fact.”

Again, let me refer back to metamorphic petrology. Try telling a metamorpic petrologist that schists, gneisses, marbles or slates were formed in the last 6,000 or 10,000 or 1,000,000 years and see what kind of response you get. Then try telling them that the only reason they think that it takes a very long time for metamorphic rocks to form is that they are covering for evolution and see if they agree with you. Here’s a hint: They won’t agree. You see, their work is based on chemistry and the chemical processes are well understood. And not a single fossil or animal has been used to determine that chemistry.

In FACT, the observations of canyon building, etc. at Mt. Saint Helens showed how quickly formations that would have been estimated to be eons old, were in FACT created in hours or days. This was OBSERVABLE science as opposed to interpretation of the present to fit a “presupposed” past.

Mt. St. Helens is a great example of extrusive igneous deposition but is totally irrelevant to a) development of canyons in formations of different material and b) the formation of other types of stata.

For example, the Black Canyon of the Gunnison in Colorado is cut into gneisses and schists. These are crystalline metamorphic rocks that were originally some other type of rock that were changed because of temperature and pressure. These rocks, unlike the ash at Mt. St. Helens, are very hard and resistant to erosion. So the claim that the canyons formed at Mt. St. Helens indicate that all canyons formed very rapidly are bogus.

I haven’t read of a single carbonate or evaporite formed by the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, yet there are thousands of feet of these types of rocks in the Permian Basin of West Texas. How long did it take for them to form based on what we learned from Mt. St. Helens? The answer is that we didn’t learn anything about them from that eruption and subsequent erosion. Before you come back with some silly response like “those rocks could have been deposited rapidly”, please take a minute and search a geology site and learn what carbonates and evaporites are and how they form.

Whitcomb & Morris’s “The Genesis Flood” *(link in previous post) *gives abundant evidence supporting a world-wide flood, and much more has been written in support since then.

Perhaps it will surprise you, but I have read that book. It is, in my opinion, a waste of time and certainly not a geology book. The FACT is there is not only no evidence FOR a world-wide flood but there is massive evidence AGAINST a world-wide flood.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Page 2

The following quotes are from supporters of YOUR view! Fascinating.

Oh, good. The ol’ quote mining approach. Sigh.

Rather than answer this stuff quote by quote, I’ll let you read where they have been addressed before.

talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html

it says that Jesus was the agent of creation, that He made (ex nihilo) all that is created.

My Jesus made a perfect world, man, in Adam, caused it all to be cursed.

I agree with that.

Your Jesus, created death disease, evil and bloodshed for millions or billions of years in a survival of the fittest plan.

Hmm. I didn’t know I had my own personal Jesus.

I think I’ll stick with the Jesus of the Bible.

As will I.

Peace

Tim

 

[Deus_Vult]

I firmly believe in evolution and also have a firm belief it is the creation that God speaks of in Genesis. One must analyze evolution in the light of faith, stepping into an area that has long been a religious and scientific minefield. While in fact, Christian’s have a responsibility to locate the scientific understanding of the universe within a Christian vision of creation. It is in my belief wrong for them to ignore the truth and makes it even harder for them to bring more into the fold. It is our responsibility to help them understand these truths. First, you have to accept as likely the prevailing tenets of evolutionary science: the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in a “big bang”; the earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago; all living organisms on earth descended from a first organism; and man emerged some 40,000 years ago with the development of the larger, human brain.

Second, there is a divine design in specific processes of evolution. While acknowledging that some experts do see a providential design in biological structures, such development might also be contingent, or dependant on chance. True contingency in the created order is not incompatible with a purposeful divine providence. In other words, God’s plan allowed for all kinds of variables to play out. Or, any evolutionary mechanism that is contingent can only be contingent because God made it so. But is the emergence of man one of these chance results? Or did God play creationist in this instance? That’s the crux of the current debate. Most people would pose the question this way: Did we come out of a necessary process or a chance process? If it’s a necessary process, God did it. If it’s chance, why do you need God? But I think the question itself is wrong. It’s not just necessity or chance, it’s also opportunity. Humans live in a universe that statistically offers so many opportunities for the life-building processes to work together. In a universe so fertile in opportunity, it was inevitable. I say inevitable, not necessary – that human beings emerged. That’s the way our God made it…God created the “Big Bang” for this very reason.

Evolution is more than a hypothesis and had been widely accepted by scientists not Christians. Here lays the problem, the scientists do not believe in God so it is difficult for Christians to believe anything they say. In fact we may have an easier time convincing the non-believers with this than the Christian. We must insist that man was not just a link in the evolutionary chain. The emergence of man marked an ontological leap … the moment of transition to the spiritual that cannot fully be explained in scientific terms.

Expanding on that argument, the appearance of the first members of the human race must be attributed to some form of divine intervention. It speaks of God acting through causal chains from the beginning of cosmic history to prepare for the special creation of the human soul. God is a personal creator, not an impersonal force or energy. Man is the only creature on earth that God willed for his own sake. Well, are humans forced by revealed, religious truth to accept a dualistic view of the origins of the human person evolutionist with respect to the material dimension, creationist with respect to the spiritual dimension? And could a case be made for a type of divine creation that did not pre-ordain human beings, or which might have even produced thinking beings different than humans? Does that contradict religious truth? Not, as it appears to me , if theologians can develop a more profound understanding of God’s continuous creation that allows for freedom at all levels of the evolutionary process maybe…but there is only one right and that is what I speak of.

The wider discussion on evolution between religion and science is marked by misunderstandings. The term creation, for example, is about existence itself, not the chain of events which bring about a specific kind of being. Likewise, when religions speak of God “creating out of nothing,” scientists often equate it incorrectly with the vacuum of quantum mechanics.

God should not be understood as a dictator, who has fine tuned the universe to run like a watch. But it will take considerable dialogue and reflection by Christian thinkers before a central tension is resolved between the omnipotence of God and the dynamism of a universe in evolution.

 

[Rickzee]

Sorry I’ve been away for a while…

Just to let you know I have not forgotten y’all.

Evolutionist Agrees: Darwinism Faith-Based
By Stephen Caesar

Skeptics of evolution have long claimed that Darwin’s theory is untestable and relies on faith rather than empirical observation. Now, at least two important figures in the field of evolutionary origins have agreed with this position.

Kevin Padian, professor of integrative biology and curator in the Museum of Paleontology at the University of California at Berkeley and co-editor of The Encyclopedia of Dinosaurs, reviewed a book on evolution in the February, 2000, issue of Scientific American. The book was In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life by evolutionist Henry Gee, an editor and senior writer at the prestigious scientific journal Nature. Dr. Gee is also a paleontologist with experience in the field.

Prof. Padian’s review, entitled “What the Media Don’t Tell You About Evolution,” contained some astonishing admissions. For example, Padian stated:

“Gee shows that many traditional explanations of major evolutionary transitions are not testable and therefore have no scientific content….[For example,] ideas about how flight must have evolved, he says, rely on faith in the particular workings of natural selection or other evolutionary processes” (Padian 2000: 103).

This is exactly what skeptics of Darwin’s theory have always claimed, usually to a strongly negative response. Another objection raised by non-Darwinists is that fossils that purport to provide indisputable evidence for human evolution from more-primitive, apelike ancestors (known as hominids) are not as straightforward and unmistakable as many would have us believe. This is precisely what Gee has intimated in his book, as Padian pointed out:

“Gee describes the difficulty of reconstructing the past using his experience searching for hominid fossils in Africa with Meave Leakey’s crew. A bone you pick up might be a hominid and might persuasively be not far from the direct line to living humans. But you can never really know, because not enough information is preserved. Deep Time, with its attendant destruction of information from the geologic past, has wiped away direct evidence. We have to reconstruct evolutionary history, as we reconstruct human history, from the bits and pieces we have available to us” (ibid.).

Again, this is a claim that non-Darwinists have made on countless occasions, either to deaf ears or to shouts of derision. The study of human origins is extremely difficult, clouded as it is with prevailing and countervailing theories, fragmentary evidence, varying interpretations of certain fossil finds, human foibles, and a strong dose of personal pride thrown in. Rock-ribbed dogmatism or unswerving adherence to a single theory or a particular fossil find can prove to be disappointing at best and dangerous at worst.
Reference:

Padian, K. 2000. “What the Media Don’t Tell You about Evolution.” Review of In Search of Deep Time: Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life, by Henry Gee, 1999. Scientific American, vol. 282, no. 2

Stephen Caesar holds his master’s degree in anthropology/archaeology from Harvard.

.

 

[Rickzee]

Deus Vult I firmly believe in evolution and also have a firm belief it is the creation that God speaks of in Genesis. One must analyze evolution in the light of faith, stepping into an area that has long been a religious and scientific minefield.

It was Augustine who was the main proponent of regula fidei, the rule of faith. While all Christians are indebted to the early church leaders and their work, we are still personally responsible before God for our own understanding. However, “Augustine’s rule of faith, his submission to church authority, and his use of ecclesiastical motifs to define reality encouraged acquiescence to ecclesiological uniformity and contributed to the ossification of hermeneutics.”
Biblical Hermeneutics, 2nd ed. Corley, Lemke, Lovejoy, Broadman & Holman Pub. Nashville 2002

Joachim of Fiore believed the purpose of bible study was NOT to undergird Catholic doctrine.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joachim_of_Fiore

The main argument between RC & non-RC has to do with authority. Is the ecclesiastical church the ultimate authority or are the scriptures as illumined by the leading of the Holy Spirit? Another way of stating this would be to ask if the authority of an institution made up of sinful fallible men & women (of ANY denomination) who can be swayed by a socio-political hermeneutic to be preferred to a unchanging written record properly interpreted using a grammatico-historical hermeneutic?

Deus Vult While in fact, Christian’s have a responsibility to locate the scientific understanding of the universe within a Christian vision of creation. It is in my belief wrong for them to ignore the TRUTH and makes it even harder for them to bring more into the fold. Emphasis mine

The Six Literal Days, no-death-before-original sin, view is based on the assumptions:

1. the scriptures are the Word of God.
   thebereanfellowship.org/ChicagoInerrant.dsp
2. Jesus is the Word of God made flesh. John 1:14
3. Jesus is God (the Son of the Trinity)
   John 1:1
4. Jesus is the truth.
   John 1:14 above, John 3:18-21, John 8:45, John 14:6,
5. Jesus taught:
   A. Adam and Eve were real, historical, created (Hebrew BARA ברא) people.
   Matthew 19:4, Mark 10:6,
   B. The scriptures are trustworthy and accurate.
   Luke 24:27, Matthew 24:28
   C. He taught a global flood. Luke 17:27

Rick <><
end Pt. 1

 

[Orogeny]

Sorry I’ve been away for a while…

Just to let you know I have not forgotten y’all.

Evolutionist Agrees: Darwinism Faith-Based
By Stephen Caesar.

Who is Stephen Caesar and why should we care what he says? You should really give a link if you are going to cut and past a quote-mined article someone else has written.

Peace

Tim

 

[Rickzee]

Deus Vult
First, you have to accept as likely the prevailing tenets of evolutionary science: the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in a “big bang”; the earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago; all living organisms on earth descended from a first organism; and man emerged some 40,000 years ago with the development of the larger, human brain.

Why do “I” have to accept the “prevailing tenets of evolutionary science?” There is a huge difference between OPERATIONAL science, and HISTORICAL science. The promoters of evolution are constantly mixing the two! Creationists were the founders, in large part, of operational science! I am a supporter of operational science. However I would very, very strongly encourage everyone to study the ASSUMPTIONS of evolution and old earth theory. Teaching something dogmatically does not make it “truth.” Neither does a majority make something “right.” Rooted in evolutionary teaching is racism, one so called race is more evolved than another, genocide, survival of the fittest by tooth and claw, abortion, the Holocaust, and a host of other social, moral and ethical ills.
The Bible speaks of these things specifically as they relate to creation:

The apostle Peter speaking prophetically in his 2nd epistle chapter 3
Verse 1 a reminder, verse 2 what the prophets spoke about (old testament), what Jesus commanded, and what the apostles taught. Verse 3 towards the time when Jesus would return there would be mockers asking when would He return.

And then the positions of the mockers:
Everything continues just as it has — UNIFORMITARIANISM

Verses 5-6
5 λανθανει γαρ αυτους τουτο θελοντας οτι ουρανοι ησαν εκπαλαι και γη εξ υδατος και δι υδατος συνεστωσα τω του θεου λογω
6 δι ων ο τοτε κοσμος υδατι κατακλυσθεις απωλετο
They (the mockers) are WILLFULL in their refusal to acknowledge that the earth was formed out of and by water in and through the creation and global flood.

Genesis 1:2 originally the entire globe was covered with water, dry land appears in verse 9
Psalm 104:6-8 (with Strong’s #)
Psa 104:8 יעלו5927 הרים2022 ירדו3381 בקעות1237 אל413 מקום4725 זה2088 יסדת3245 להם׃1992
Creation/flood geology “the mountains rose and the valleys sank down.”

Again, 2Peter 3:10
The “Big Bang” is yet to come!
And verse 15 Paul’s writings were already considered by Peter to be “Scripture!”

So what does Paul say about this?
Romans 1:18-22
Rom 1:18 αποκαλυπτεται γαρ οργη θεου απ ουρανου επι πασαν ασεβειαν και αδικιαν ανθρωπων των την αληθειαν εν αδικια κατεχοντων

God’s wrath is towards those who suppress the truth. (willfully ignore said Peter) (won’t allow a dissenting view?)

Rom 1:19 διοτι το γνωστον του θεου φανερον εστιν εν αυτοις ο TSBγαρ θεος Aγαρ αυτοις εφανερωσεν

God left evidence which can be understood IF we start with God rather than man.

Rom 1:20 τα γαρ αορατα αυτου απο κτισεως κοσμου τοις ποιημασιν νοουμενα καθοραται η τε αιδιος αυτου δυναμις και θειοτης εις το ειναι αυτους αναπολογητους

Creation is the key, understanding His power, through what has been “made” so we are without excuse.

Rom 1:21 διοτι γνοντες τον θεον ουχ ως θεον εδοξασαν η Aηυχαριστησαν TSBευχαριστησαν αλλ εματαιωθησαν εν τοις διαλογισμοις αυτων και εσκοτισθη η ασυνετος αυτων καρδια

But even though they knew God, did not give thanks but became “futile in their speculation”

Rom 1:22 φασκοντες ειναι σοφοι εμωρανθησαν
“professing to be wise, they became fools…”

Rick <><
End Pt. 2

 

[Rickzee]

Deus Vult
The term creation, for example, is about existence itself, not the chain of events which bring about a specific kind of being. Likewise, when religions speak of God “creating out of nothing,” scientists often equate it incorrectly with the vacuum of quantum mechanics.

H1254
ָבָּרא
bārā’: A verb meaning to create. Only God is the subject of this verb. It is used for His creating: heaven and earth (Gen_1:1); humanity (Gen_1:27); the heavenly host (Isa_40:26); the ends of the earth (Isa_40:28); north and south (Psa_89:12 [13]); righteousness; salvation (Isa_45:8); evil (Isa_45:7). David asked God to “create” in him a clean heart (Psa_51:10 [12]). Isaiah promised that God will create a new heaven and earth (Isa_65:17).

The Complete Word Study Dictionary
© 1992 By AMG International, Inc.
Chattanooga, TN 37422, U.S.A.
Revised edition, 1993

Rick <><
end Pt. 3a

 

[Rickzee]

Continued from above

Gen 1:1 -
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” - Heaven and earth have not existed from all eternity, but had a beginning; nor did they arise by emanation from an absolute substance, but were created by God. This sentence, which stands at the head of the records of revelation, is not a mere heading, nor a summary of the history of the creation, but a declaration of the primeval act of God, by which the universe was called into being. That this verse is not a heading merely, is evident from the fact that the following account of the course of the creation commences with w (and), which connects the different acts of creation with the fact expressed in Gen_1:1, as the primary foundation upon which they rest. בּרשׁיח (in the beginning) is used absolutely, like ἐν ἀρχῇ in Joh_1:1, and מראשׁיח in Isa_46:10. The following clause cannot be treated as subordinate, either by rendering it, “in the beginning when God created …, the earth was,” etc., or “in the beginning when God created…(but the earth was then a chaos, etc.), God said, Let there be light” (Ewald and Bunsen). The first is opposed to the grammar of the language, which would require Gen_1:2 to commence with הארץ ותּהי; the second to the simplicity of style which pervades the whole chapter, and to which so involved a sentence would be intolerable, apart altogether from the fact that this construction is invented for the simple purpose of getting rid of the doctrine of a creatio ex nihilo, which is so repulsive to modern Pantheism. ראשׁיח in itself is a relative notion, indicating the commencement of a series of things or events; but here the context gives it the meaning of the very first beginning, the commencement of the world, when time itself began. The statement, that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, not only precludes the idea of the eternity of the world a parte ante, but shows that the creation of the heaven and the earth was the actual beginning of all things. The verb בּרא, indeed, to judge from its use in Jos_17:15, Jos_17:18, where it occurs in the Piel (to hew out), means literally “to cut, or new,” but in Kal it always means to create, and is only applied to a divine creation, the production of that which had no existence before. It is never joined with an accusative of the material, although it does not exclude a pre-existent material unconditionally, but is used for the creation of man (Gen_1:27; Gen_5:1-2), and of everything new that God creates, whether in the kingdom of nature (Num_16:30) or of that of grace (Exo_34:10; Psa_51:10, etc.). In this verse, however, the existence of any primeval material is precluded by the object created: “the heaven and the earth.” This expression is frequently employed to denote the world, or universe, for which there was no single word in the Hebrew language; the universe consisting of a twofold whole, and the distinction between heaven and earth being essentially connected with the notion of the world, the fundamental condition of its historical development (vid., Gen_14:19, Gen_14:22; Exo_31:17). In the earthly creation this division is repeated in the distinction between spirit and nature; and in man, as the microcosm, in that between spirit and body. Through sin this distinction was changed into an actual opposition between heaven and earth, flesh and spirit; but with the complete removal of sin, this opposition will cease again, though the distinction between heaven and earth, spirit and body, will remain, in such a way, however, that the earthly and corporeal will be completely pervaded by the heavenly and spiritual, the new Jerusalem coming down from heaven to earth, and the earthly body being transfigured into a spiritual body (Rev_21:1-2; 1Co_15:35.). Hence, if in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, “there is nothing belonging to the composition of the universe, either in material or form, which had an existence out of God prior to this divine act in the beginning” (Delitzsch). This is also shown in the connection between our verse and the one which follows: “and the earth was without form and void,” not before, but when, or after God created it. From this it is evident that the void and formless state of the earth was not uncreated, or without beginning. At the same time it is obvious from the creative acts which follow (vv. 3-18), that the heaven and earth, as God created them in the beginning, were not the well-ordered universe, but the world in its elementary form; just as Euripides applies the expression οὐρανὸς καὶ γαῖα to the undivided mass (οπφὴμία), which was afterwards formed into heaven and earth.

Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
Johann (C.F.) Keil (1807-1888) & Franz Delitzsch (1813-1890)

Rick <><
End Part 3b

 

[Rickzee]

continued from above…

Does God lie? Did Jesus lie?

3rd Commandment (Catholic list) 4th Commandment (non-RC list)
Exodus 20:8-11
8 "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 "Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.
11 "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

Matthew 12:8 (Jesus said) “For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
Mark 2:27-28 Jesus said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. “So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
Luke 6:5 And He was saying to them, “The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

So, the commandment is based on an historical event, a six day creation, not millions of years. Should I trust science which is constantly “updating” their books because of old outdated (wrong) information? The Bible stays the same.
Jesus put it this way:
Luke 16:29-31
‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.’
30 "But he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent!’
31 “But he said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.’”

So, what did Moses have to say?

Exodus 31:18
18 When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.

Deuteronomy 9:10
"The LORD gave me the two tablets of stone written by the finger of God; and on them were all the words which the LORD had spoken with you at the mountain from the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly.

Romans 3:4
Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, “THAT YOU MAY BE JUSTIFIED IN YOUR WORDS, AND PREVAIL WHEN YOU ARE JUDGED.”

Deuteronomy 4:2 (God speaking)
"You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

Matthew 5:18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

Revelation 22:18-19
I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

Did God Lie?

Rick <><
End Pt. 3