Apologetic argument I am confused by.

[SpiritofFire]

All things (good and bad) work for the good of God.

 

[Bookends]

I am still confused as to how one could justify pain in animals though as a good thing.

Was pain, suffering, and death good for our Lord? That He should die on the cross for the benefit of mankind? Did not God reveal His invisible holy attributes by the things He has made. It was good because the universe reveals His holy plan before the foundations of the world.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Good evening all,

I am new to this forum, but I trust this topic will not have been raised already. I am sorry if it has. If so, please direct me to the proper discussion thread.

I recently attended a Creation Magazine seminar at a local church and there was a statement made that I understand in concept, but I still question.

The statement was (Paraphrased) "If the fossil record shows millions of years of death and decay before humans enter into the record why would God call death and decay 'good' or 'very good' in Genesis after the completion of Creation?"

If someone here has an apologetics background please help. I don't want to infuriate anyone, but this statement seems to be (in my opinion) too simple. My assumption is that the fossil record is true and I have read multiple Christian explanations as to how it is not. If need be please just remind me or re-enforce why the scientific data for the fossil record is biased towards millions of years.

an alternative explanation to the secular 'millions of years' interpretation of the fossil record is that virtually the entire fossil record is the result of noah's flood...the floodwaters and associated sediment buried all those creatures within one year...

 

[Cobus]

The problem with life on earth million of years ago, means there had to be ANOTHER sun and land, because God says in the beginning God created the earth and the heaven, .... Ok that could be millions years ago...But there was NO LIFEON EARTH YET..

Here is the facts.... It was DARK... No sun, no moon, therefore NO LIFE... The earth was DEEPLY covered with water. There was no form and the water was WILD,,,, Then God said let there be light.... FIRST LIGHT for the earth... NOW life might be possible... ONLY NOW!!!!

The earth (rocks and oceans WITHOUT LIFE) might be millions of years old, but LIFE was only possible after God said.... LET THERE BE LIFE oh sorry LIGHT....

 

[zone]

Good evening all,

I am new to this forum, but I trust this topic will not have been raised already. I am sorry if it has. If so, please direct me to the proper discussion thread.

I recently attended a Creation Magazine seminar at a local church and there was a statement made that I understand in concept, but I still question.

The statement was (Paraphrased) "If the fossil record shows millions of years of death and decay before humans enter into the record why would God call death and decay 'good' or 'very good' in Genesis after the completion of Creation?"

If someone here has an apologetics background please help. I don't want to infuriate anyone, but this statement seems to be (in my opinion) too simple. My assumption is that the fossil record is true and I have read multiple Christian explanations as to how it is not. If need be please just remind me or re-enforce why the scientific data for the fossil record is biased towards millions of years.

the 'scientific data' for the fossil record is biased towards millions of years, because the 'scientists' have an interest in eons and eons and star-stuff trillions and gazillions of whatever because Big Bang Cosmology is just Kabbalah.

evolution is passe, and isn't really the point of Big Bang: tikkun olam is.

anyway - fossil records (simple):

Top Evidences for Creation < click

.....

Kabbalistic Cosmology
and its parallels in the
‘Big-Bang' of Modern Physics

Kabbalistic Cosmology

vs

Body < click

 

[zone]

Good evening all,

I am new to this forum, but I trust this topic will not have been raised already. I am sorry if it has. If so, please direct me to the proper discussion thread.

I recently attended a Creation Magazine seminar at a local church and there was a statement made that I understand in concept, but I still question.

The statement was (Paraphrased) "If the fossil record shows millions of years of death and decay before humans enter into the record why would God call death and decay 'good' or 'very good' in Genesis after the completion of Creation?"

If someone here has an apologetics background please help. I don't want to infuriate anyone, but this statement seems to be (in my opinion) too simple. My assumption is that the fossil record is true and I have read multiple Christian explanations as to how it is not. If need be please just remind me or re-enforce why the scientific data for the fossil record is biased towards millions of years.

this page was posted elsewhere on the forum by another member.
very interesting indeed:

Why the epidemic of fraud exists in science today
Science fraud epidemic < click

 

[Bookends]

The problem with life on earth million of years ago, means there had to be ANOTHER sun and land, because God says in the beginning God created the earth and the heaven, .... Ok that could be millions years ago...But there was NO LIFEON EARTH YET..

Here is the facts.... It was DARK... No sun, no moon, therefore NO LIFE... The earth was DEEPLY covered with water. There was no form and the water was WILD,,,, Then God said let there be light.... FIRST LIGHT for the earth... NOW life might be possible... ONLY NOW!!!!

The earth (rocks and oceans WITHOUT LIFE) might be millions of years old, but LIFE was only possible after God said.... LET THERE BE LIFE oh sorry LIGHT....

Just because God said let their be light, doesn't mean that is when he created light, but when God allowed light to shine through. But I agree, life without light can't survive.

And actually God said he created the heavens and the earth, notice he said Heavens first, then the earth. It doesn't say he created them at the same time, but the heavens came first, then the earth.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

And actually God said he created the heavens and the earth, notice he said Heavens first, then the earth. It doesn't say he created them at the same time, but the heavens came first, then the earth.

for dinner last night i ate macaroni and cheese...

notice that i said macaroni first and then cheese...i didn't say i ate them at the same time...but i ate the macaroni first and then the cheese...

 

[DannyC]

Some Christians think just because some believes in an old creation, that must mean they believe in biological evolution. On the contrary, all evidence points to an old universe, about 14 billions years old. This figure, according to evolution scientists, isn't even long enough for biological evolution to occur.

I might add, if Noah's flood killed all the animals, save the ones on the ark, and if that was 4000 years ago, that wouldn't even allow for micro evolution to occur. Thus I don't believe in neither evolution or micro-evolution to the degree that young earth creationist have to believe. Therefore young earthers and global flood supporters, not world-wide flood (the area that was required to wipe out mankind, not all animals- the bible doesn't say all the animals were wiped out) have to come up with quick micro evolution process to support all the variations of kinds we have on the planet today.

The age of the earth is plenty of time for evolution to occur.

 

[DannyC]

the 'scientific data' for the fossil record is biased towards millions of years, because the 'scientists' have an interest in eons and eons and star-stuff trillions and gazillions of whatever because Big Bang Cosmology is just Kabbalah.

evolution is passe, and isn't really the point of Big Bang: tikkun olam is.

anyway - fossil records (simple):

Top Evidences for Creation < click

.....

Kabbalistic Cosmology
and its parallels in the
‘Big-Bang' of Modern Physics

Kabbalistic Cosmology

vs

Body < click

Are you honestly being serious with that link for creation? It just asserts we have souls, then it asserts the bible is true, completely true. It makes no attempt to actually prove its assertions not to mention even AiG stopped using some of those failed arguments like the Second law of thermodynamics and the Cambrian explosion.

 

[zone]

The age of the earth is plenty of time for evolution to occur.

Are you honestly being serious with that link for creation? It just asserts we have souls, then it asserts the bible is true, completely true. It makes no attempt to actually prove its assertions not to mention even AiG stopped using some of those failed arguments like the Second law of thermodynamics and the Cambrian explosion.

DannyC

Spiritual Status:
not Christian
When saved:
I'm not saved.

http://christianchat.com/miscellaneous/55743-geocentrism.html < click

-

OP: sorry for any derailment from FOSSIL records

.....

Oil is NOT a fossil fuel and AGW is non-science

By Guest Column (Bio and Archives) Monday, July 14, 2008
by Peter J. Morgan

We all grew up believing that oil is a fossil fuel, and just about every day this ‘fact’ is mentioned in newspapers and on TV. However, let us not forget what Lenin said – “A lie told often enough becomes truth.” It was in 1757 that the great Russian scholar Mikhailo V. Lomonosov enunciated the hypothesis that oil might originate from biological detritus. The scientists who first rejected Lomonsov’s hypothesis, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, were the famous German naturalist and geologist Alexander von Humboldt and the French chemist and thermodynamicist Louis Joseph Gay-Lussac, who together enunciated the proposition that oil is a primordial material erupted from great depth, and is unconnected with any biological matter near the surface of the Earth....

Oil is NOT a fossil fuel and AGW is non-science < click



DannyC -

not much interesting in:

a) derailing the Op's intent, so won't be posting here again (why don't ya start another thread, maybe?)

b) arguing with an 'atheist' who KNOWS there's a God , he knows WHO that God is, but hates Him and refuses to give Him Glory, or accept His account of His own creation (most of us were once where you are. blah blah....save yourself some time, and possible reprobation, and quit pretending you don't believe, cuz the Bible says ya do...and we all know it)...

seek the Gospel, you gon' need it.

 

[DannyC]

DannyC

Spiritual Status:
not Christian
When saved:
I'm not saved.

http://christianchat.com/miscellaneous/55743-geocentrism.html < click

-

OP: sorry for any derailment from FOSSIL records

.....

Oil is NOT a fossil fuel and AGW is non-science

By Guest Column (Bio and Archives) Monday, July 14, 2008
by Peter J. Morgan

We all grew up believing that oil is a fossil fuel, and just about every day this ‘fact’ is mentioned in newspapers and on TV. However, let us not forget what Lenin said – “A lie told often enough becomes truth.” It was in 1757 that the great Russian scholar Mikhailo V. Lomonosov enunciated the hypothesis that oil might originate from biological detritus. The scientists who first rejected Lomonsov’s hypothesis, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, were the famous German naturalist and geologist Alexander von Humboldt and the French chemist and thermodynamicist Louis Joseph Gay-Lussac, who together enunciated the proposition that oil is a primordial material erupted from great depth, and is unconnected with any biological matter near the surface of the Earth....

Oil is NOT a fossil fuel and AGW is non-science < click

not much intersting in:

a) derailing the Ops intent

b) arguing with an atheist who KNOWS there's a God , he knows WHO that God is, but hates Him and refuses to give Him Glory, or accept His account of His own creation (most of us were once where you are. blah blah....save yourself some time, and possible reprobation, and quit pretending you don't believe, cuz the Bible says ya do...and we all know it)...

seek the Gospel, you gon need it.

I know my own spiritual status, I was the one who placed it there.

So you now assert I know there is a God? You also assert I hate him? Now you also assert everyone agrees with your pseudo-analysis? Pretty huge claims from someone who recieved less than a paragraph of writing from me.

Considering you ignored my comment regarding The second law of thermodynamics and The cambrian explosion and now I see they also try to use Irreducible complexity as an argument. Do you even want to defend your own links or make sweeping statements about people you don't know?

 

[zone]

I know my own spiritual status, I was the one who placed it there.

So you now assert I know there is a God? You also assert I hate him? Now you also assert everyone agrees with your pseudo-analysis? Pretty huge claims from someone who recieved less than a paragraph of writing from me.

Considering you ignored my comment regarding The second law of thermodynamics and The cambrian explosion and now I see they also try to use Irreducible complexity as an argument. Do you even want to defend your own links or make sweeping statements about people you don't know?

k....last post here, since i do not want to derail the OP's questions about FOSSIL RECORDS:

DannyC -

NOBODY is an 'atheist', dear....not even you

Romans 1
God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness
18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

24Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.



k....over - sorry OP.

(start a new thread if you want to)

 

[DannyC]

k....last post here, since i do not want to derail the OP's questions about FOSSIL RECORDS:

DannyC -

NOBODY is an 'atheist', dear....not even you

Romans 1
God’s Wrath on Unrighteousness
18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

24Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. 29They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, 30slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.



k....over - sorry OP.

(start a new thread if you want to)

Evidently you cannot support your assertions.

 

[Bookends]

for dinner last night i ate macaroni and cheese...

notice that i said macaroni first and then cheese...i didn't say i ate them at the same time...but i ate the macaroni first and then the cheese...

I understand your argument, neither does the text say he created them together, nor at separate times, but simply states He created them both.

 

[Bookends]

The age of the earth is plenty of time for evolution to occur.

Not from soup to a complex life form.

 

[danschance]

Good evening all,

I recently attended a Creation Magazine seminar at a local church and there was a statement made that I understand in concept, but I still question.

The statement was (Paraphrased) "If the fossil record shows millions of years of death and decay before humans enter into the record why would God call death and decay 'good' or 'very good' in Genesis after the completion of Creation?"

Trolling hard!

This is a straw man argument. God said creation was good, as He created it. Death came into the picture when Adam and Eve sinned. The bible says Adam's sin brought death into the world and changed everything.

You are obviously not a Christian and are here like many others who have been banned. Coming here to simply prove the bible is in error. By the way, you posted this in the wrong category. It should of been posted in the Miscellaneous category.

 

[danschance]

I really loath posts that start of with:

I went to church and read my bible but I have this one simple question..and if you can answer it I will become a Christian and give you my toenail collection and I really hope all the apologists answer so I can prove how smart I am. blah, blah, blah...?

 

[Bookends]

for dinner last night i ate macaroni and cheese...

notice that i said macaroni first and then cheese...i didn't say i ate them at the same time...but i ate the macaroni first and then the cheese...

One more point I'd add, I'd guarantee that your two ingredients, macaroni and cheese, have two different creation dates. You are the one that put them together, a process, to make the two suitable for consumption. Your analogy fits better with view of the beginning then yours, so can you please come up with a better analogy?