No trust in Creation...no trust in Genesis....no trust in Scriptures...

[Angela53510]

Poor school training in math and english and arythmetic and science is the cause of believe in the religion of evolution

it is impossible for life to form itself

each cell has 13000 protien molecules some as large as a million daltons which have to be creaated in the same microsecond or the cell wall will impled

this is HARDER to create one cell than to simultaneoulsly create the entire internet and all computers in the world with one lightning strike

Every person will choose

god is good, he gave them a long healthy life even though they hated him but soon it will be over

those who didnt want God will die and never be heard from again

those who love god will live forever

totally fair.

Please tell me you are joking about the bolded part! Seriously, if I was your English teacher, you would get a fail on this post, the spelling, grammar and punctuation is so bad. I can do a corrected copy if you want!

If you only want to remember ONE THING in future posts - please CAPITALIZE the word God!

Even if you are posting from a phone, and I get that it plays auto-correct tricks - go back and edit, as any good English teacher will tell you, and make sure the sovereign Lord of the universe has a capital letter. Every time!!

PS. It's not just you that does this, and it drives me mad! GOD needs a capital, or it is just any old god or idol!

 

[Angela53510]

Since I was saved, because I came to disbelieve in evolution while taking science in a secular university, I think it is incredibly important. I started searching for the Creator, and Jesus found me!

I don't know how many times I have been told that someone doesn't believe in God, because science has proved evolution to be true. So that means creation is VERY important. And it is the foundation to witness to unbelievers. Besides, evolution is just a bad paradigm, so many things assumed, and nothing able to be proved, ever! Evolution is a model, not a hypothesis, nor a fact!

I believe the Bible, and that starts with Genesis 1.

 

[Pottyone]

Well the one thing I suppose we can all agree on is the fact that there is no proof for either position on either a young or old eart but there is certainly any amount of evidence to support a young earth. Many of the processes which are cited to be evidence for an earth billions of years old have in fact been replicated in laboratories such as the formation of coal and oil deposits under huge pressures, natural selection from the existing gene pool to form variations within species ( selective breeding programs and GM ). In addition, the biblical account of a global catastrophic flood would be highly likely to produce changes in the environment on earth to account for many of the observations such as huge deposits of sedimentary rock and the dispersal of fossils across the plant including aquatic fossils found high up in mountainous regions.
On the contrary much ofthe evidence put forward to support an old earth has been scientifically discredited being shown to be unreliable and flawed. These include radiometric dating which give erroneous dates of hundreds of thousands of years for rock material known to be only hundreds of years old as a result of volcanic eruptions, 14C dating which seemingly shows that organic material such as fossilised sea creatures, are less than 100 000 years old as they still contain 14C which should have been totally decayed into nitrogen at the claimed age. Fossils of animals with organic material still present in their gut...this should have totally decomposed by this stage ....and the list goes on.

 

[Tintin]

It's not a salvation issue but it's very important in having a well-reasoned faith (a good foundation requires Genesis) and if one wishes to be an effective witness, especially in foreign countries.

 

[JackH]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wtx8__yX3uk- Why evolution is stupid- Dr Kent Hovind

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-YObQwO_4o- Evolution is not scientific- Malcolm Bowden

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmcv5Ro9BYo- God inspired the Bible, mathematically proven- Malcolm Bowden

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/2UXclhjZods/mqdefault.jpg- Evidence against evolution and for creation- Malcolm Bowden

Free File Hosting - Online Storage; Upload Mp3, Videos, Music. Backup Files Creation declares the Glory of God, the scientific evidence of God's visitation in Exodus 19-20.

Hallelujah!

The missing links have been discovered. For every link you can provide like these, I can provide a hundred indicating otherwise.

The preponderance of the evidence is that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old, as opposed to around 6,000 years old.

Let me ask you this:

Occasionally some new discovery is made, for example skeletal remains of dinosaurs or genus homo, and there is an article in a major newspaper or the nightly news. The remains are claimed to be at least hundreds of thousands of years old in the article or video.

Why isn't there ever anything in the report of the discovery that it could be only around 6,000 years old, according to the Young Earth Creationists?

 

[notuptome]

It's not a salvation issue but it's very important in having a well-reasoned faith (a good foundation requires Genesis) and if one wishes to be an effective witness, especially in foreign countries.

I'm not quite so certain. If God did not create the universe and man then Who is God? Can a different god who is not the Creator God still save?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[ecclescakez]

Hallelujah!

The missing links have been discovered. For every link you can provide like these, I can provide a hundred indicating otherwise.

The preponderance of the evidence is that the earth is around 4.5 billion years old, as opposed to around 6,000 years old.

Let me ask you this:

Occasionally some new discovery is made, for example skeletal remains of dinosaurs or genus homo, and there is an article in a major newspaper or the nightly news. The remains are claimed to be at least hundreds of thousands of years old in the article or video.

Why isn't there ever anything in the report of the discovery that it could be only around 6,000 years old, according to the Young Earth Creationists?

Are you serious?!?

Yeah, I can't do anything for you, you're an idiot.

 

[JackH]

Are you serious?!?

Yeah, I can't do anything for you, you're an idiot.

Keeping pertinent to the topic at hand, I submit your post as evidence that Neanderthals did exist several hundred thousand years ago.

 

[JackH]

Are you serious?!?

Yeah, I can't do anything for you, you're an idiot.

Oh, and I'm quite serious.

Don't you or anyone else who is posting on this thread have an intelligent answer to the question?

Here's another one for you and others:

For a couple hundred years the date 4004 BC was printed in the KJV right next to the verses.

Why do you suppose that date was removed from the KJV?

 

[ecclescakez]

Oh, and I'm quite serious.

Don't you or anyone else who is posting on this thread have an intelligent answer to the question?

Here's another one for you and others:

For a couple hundred years the date 4004 BC was printed in the KJV right next to the verses.

Why do you suppose that date was removed from the KJV?

Right, so I've provided examples that there are endless mathematical patterns inherent in the bible that could never have been contrived by a human author. I've provided several videos that you have refused to watch. I've shown striking paralells between the brain, the blood system and the human ear and the manifestation of God on Mount Sinai.

You have outright overlooked these. Let me guess, coincidence, lies, coincidence? In that case, run back to the lodge, no amount of evidence will suffice you if these things are not, at the very least, rather compelling.

I've demonstrated that Charles Darwin was a racist who genuinely believed blacks and aborigines were sub-human and needed to be taken off the earth, I've also shown what evolution has been used to justify. I've stated evolution is not new, its been around for 3000 years, despite the fact its presented as though it were a recent scientific advancement by "fair science", and taught in our schools as such. Not only that, but it is rooted in paganism, and is often represented by the "serpent system" of reincarnation. There's an allegiance you are not revealing, I make no presumptions as to what it is. http://saturndeathcult.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Ouroboros11.png.


Ok, well, ask someone who studies the Bible for a living if 4004BC was scrubbed from the book. One right back at you.

I got a few questions for you:

Why is Darwin's theory presented as new in school books? WHY ARE ITS PAGAN ROOTS NEVER MENTIONED?
It might help to know it was passed from hindu brahmins to the likes of pythagoras, the alexandrian school, underground in the Christian church, through to freemasonry, and up to today. At least we could make a more informed opinion on this garbage.

WHY IS DARWIN'S DISTURBING RACISM NEVER CITED? Is it not relevant because he's a "scientific hero"?? This donkey is on the british £10 note. He's no hero of mine.

Seeing as it is impossible that the numerical patterns found in the Bible could have been contrived, how do you explain this away? Let me guess, its all made up, the Bible could never be true right?

Why does God's appearance on Mount Sinai correlate with the human brain, the blood system, and the human ear? Let me guess, we evolved from lightning, smoke and trumpets, or, they made it up, its all fake.

 

[superdave5221]

Hello Liza,

You have it backwards. It is not our job to reconcile scripture with man's word. We should instead, recognize that God is the creator of the universe, He never lies, and His Word is totally trustworthy. Therefore, we begin with God's Word, and reconcile the evidence found in His creation with His Word.

We interpret the bible using a hermeneutic, which is consistent for the entire bible, not just those verses following Genesis 1-11. When we do this, we find that exegetically, the word "yom" in Genesis is a literal 24 hour day. It is defined in Gen. 1:4-5 in terms of a light/dark cycle. It is further defined with the terms "evening and morning". It is modified with a number, thus first day, second day, ect. When the word "yom" is modified in this way, it almost always means a literal 24 hour day. In Gen. 1:14 it is defined literally in relation to heavenly bodies. Exodus 20:11 is the final nail in the coffin of those who would exegete millions of years from Genesis.

Jesus clearly stated that Scripture has authority over man's ideas and traditions (Mat. 15:1-9), and in Mark 10:6 clearly states that Adam and Eve were there in the beginning of God's creation, not after billions of years. Genesis is not allegorical literature. It is a historical narrative.

There are a couple of clear reasons for not reconciling "science" with the bible. To begin with, it is not necessary. The so called age of the universe is not "science". Since the origins of the Earth are not reproducible in a lab, being history, the relative ages of the earth and universe is not science, but a philosophical belief. The belief in uniformitarianism, cannot be proven scientifically, and there is considerable evidence, such as natural chronometers, radiohalos in rock formations, ect. which is inconsistent with this theory. Radiometric dating is based on presuppositions that are extremely biased against supernatural causes, and have been shown to be grossly in error in many cases.

Do not be deceived by the arguments that billions of years are "proven" by science, whereas a "young earth" belief is "religion". Both arguments come from philosophical beliefs that cannot be proven. The difference is the starting point. Do we start with God's Word, or do we believe that man knows more than God?

The second reason for believing in a literal Genesis is that the Old Earth positions impugns the character of God. God said that His creation was "very good". Would a loving God say that an earth filled with dead creatures was "very good"? Furthermore, it undermines the very reason for redemption. God said that death entered the world because of Adam's sin. Jesus had to die on the cross to pay the penalty for sin, and conquer death. But the fossil record is one of death and destruction. Animals eating each other, thorns in the ground, fossils showing signs of cancer and other abnormalities. Is this God's perfect creation?

A third reason for not believing in billions of years is that it creates doubt in the minds of young Christians, who are shown the supposed inconsistencies in the Bible, and man's "fix" for those inconsistencies. Once doubt creeps in for Gen. 1-11, it is not long before doubt increases for the rest of the Bible. Satan has attacked God's Word right from the beginning. Satan said, "Did God really say not to eat from all of the trees in the garden"? Did God really say that He created the universe in six days?

There are no real inconsistencies in the bible. There may be some things that we are still do not have a complete knowledge of. Do not question the authority of God's Word, by imposing man's word over His. God's Word is completely reliable. Trust Him. It is the wise thing to do.

 

[2Thewaters]

there is no theory of evolution

a theory is a scientific HYPOTHESIS that is PROVEN in the laboratory to be true

and they admit you cannot prove evolution in a laboratory

so make sure you point out that it cannot be a theory

Evolution is NOT a scientific theory
if is a FALSE RELIGION of false faith

 

[ecclescakez]

While I am at it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLrShr53cGk- The religion of Evolution

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VhKFe6ildQ- Exposing the pagan roots of evolution

 

[JackH]

Ok, well, ask someone who studies the Bible for a living if 4004BC was scrubbed from the book. One right back at you.

Are you implying that the date 4004 BC was not in the KJV for a couple hundred years right next to the verses in Genesis1?

 

[ecclescakez]

What you do speaks for itself.

 

[Nautilus]

I honestly don't think you need a stone-strong belief in creation to be saved. Salvation comes from Jesus not your opinions of YEC vs OEC, creationism, gays, the 1st covenant vs the 2nd, saturday or sunday, etc. This is actually one of the biggest downfalls existing in modern christianity its that every little sect and group has things they add one to the requirements of salvation. According to John 3:16 whosoever beleievs in ME shall have eternal life. not whosoever believes in ME and x,y,and z shall have eternal life.

 

[JackH]

A third reason for not believing in billions of years is that it creates doubt in the minds of young Christians

Why do you suppose a 6,000-year-old earth is not generally taught in our institutions of higher learning?

Young Christians who are learning to think for themselves are likely to raise their eyebrows and try to stifle a snicker at such when the preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise.

Of course, many evangelicals and fundamentalists and most of the individuals posting on this thread will still say the earth is flat, no matter what. Now that is what I can credible witnessing (cough).

 

[superdave5221]

I honestly don't think you need a stone-strong belief in creation to be saved. Salvation comes from Jesus not your opinions of YEC vs OEC, creationism, gays, the 1st covenant vs the 2nd, saturday or sunday, etc. This is actually one of the biggest downfalls existing in modern christianity its that every little sect and group has things they add one to the requirements of salvation. According to John 3:16 whosoever beleievs in ME shall have eternal life. not whosoever believes in ME and x,y,and z shall have eternal life.

You are right. It is not required to believe in YEC to be saved.

But how do you respond to non Christians who have questions about the authority of the Bible in Genesis? Do you say, well Genesis doesn't matter. The Bible, where you get God's revelations about Jesus and His redemption, is the same book where Genesis comes from. If we can't believe God when it comes to earthly issues, then how are we to trust Him with our salvation?

Even if you don't see the connection here, many non Christians will, and they will reject your proclamation of the gospel message. Does this matter to you?

 

[superdave5221]

Why do you suppose a 6,000-year-old earth is not generally taught in our institutions of higher learning?

Young Christians who are learning to think for themselves are likely to raise their eyebrows and try to stifle a snicker at such when the preponderance of evidence indicates otherwise.

Of course, many evangelicals and fundamentalists and most of the individuals posting on this thread will still say the earth is flat, no matter what. Now that is what I can credible witnessing (cough).

Preponderance of evidence? Really? Such as?

If you start with the Bible, the observed evidence fits perfectly. There are holes in evolution that you could sail an aircraft carrier through. You owe it to yourself to throw off the blinders and actually study the evidence.

 

[StoneThrower]

Genesis 2:2 hasn't happened yet, and won't happen until Jesus Christ returns to end the Tribulation and begin the Millenium.
In other words, we are STILL in the 6th Day of Creation, which has lasted for MANY millions of years.
To believe that the universe is ONLY 6,000 years old, is ignorant nonsense.
God created the universe and He can take as long as He likes to make it evolve.

BTW - Genesis 2:2 states - ... and on the 7th Day, God rested.

Your kidding right?
God rested from creation, do you really think is is still creating stuff?
You do realize that Bio Logos (Theistic Evolution) borders on Hersey? Are you promoting that, or the Gap theory or day age?
What is your proff its over 7000 years the cambrian layer or Carbon dating?
Ever Heard of Answers in Genesis?