theistic evolution - don't try this at home
- Thread starter WIJeff
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Not really. It is in the insect's DNA to do that from which metamorphosis can happen. Same for a tadpole to a frog.
Science is about what can be observed and proven. Therefore if science cannot observe the macroevolution of a species but can only assume macroevolution, it can never be proven to be a fact; it has to remain forever in the realm of the theoritical; hence the imaginations, but it is not which is why the evolution theory, as in macro evolution, is a false science.
Science is about what can be observed and proven. Therefore if science cannot observe the macroevolution of a species but can only assume macroevolution, it can never be proven to be a fact; it has to remain forever in the realm of the theoritical; hence the imaginations, but it is not which is why the evolution theory, as in macro evolution, is a false science.
Well, you can hardly tell what will be always, right? You can only tell what you see in your life, which is max 120 years. And yes, in this time span you will probably not witness any macro evolution.
Where is it written that God created dogs to continue after their kind?
Its only because evolution is so well proved and visible all around us and American churches made it an "anti Christian issue".
So what has one to do, when he sees evolution around him and some unadecuated pastor on Sunday will tell him "no way, Earth is 6000 years old, Noah took all millions of species aboard and you must believe that!" (even though its not in any Christian creed)
Where is it written that God created dogs to continue after their kind?
Its only because evolution is so well proved and visible all around us and American churches made it an "anti Christian issue".
So what has one to do, when he sees evolution around him and some unadecuated pastor on Sunday will tell him "no way, Earth is 6000 years old, Noah took all millions of species aboard and you must believe that!" (even though its not in any Christian creed)
Last edited:
DNA of the sun is the building blocks of life, elements farther down the table of elements beyond Fe,, can only be produced from a sun supernova, God created things to be like that, let the earth bring forth planets and animals. meaning He set it in motion by His design.
as today when crops grow, trees, grass, animals etc, they will reproduce on their own by His design.
as today when crops grow, trees, grass, animals etc, they will reproduce on their own by His design.
Evolutionists do not consider it evolution. They should for the way they are going with all their unproven assumptions by observation done in the imagination, but they don't.
Probably because they can't get past the DNA that has the genetic material to do that where in regards to other species like a cow to a whale, they do not have it in them to do that right away, but assumed that gradual small changes over huge lengths of time "may" lead to that eventual big change that separates it from that kind of species. Somewhen, they switched out "may" from that hypothesis to "can" as a fact even though it was never proven that a cow macro evolved into a whale.
But not in regards to macro evolution happening gradually over time through a series of microevolution when it cannot be observed and thus it can never be proven.
Their supposition that we are all related to all living things would presuppose that all living things should be able to mingle with our "former kinds", but we cannot. They argue for natural selection, but all the former kinds that we supposedly evolved from are still here but the kinds of the changes inbetween those kinds are conveniently selected for extinction?
That is why Punctuated Macroevolution or Rapid Macroevolution was proposed because Gradual Macroevolution cannot happen with such a huge gap in the fossil record, but evolutionists still argue for gradual macroevolution as if it is still true.
Probably because they can't get past the DNA that has the genetic material to do that where in regards to other species like a cow to a whale, they do not have it in them to do that right away, but assumed that gradual small changes over huge lengths of time "may" lead to that eventual big change that separates it from that kind of species. Somewhen, they switched out "may" from that hypothesis to "can" as a fact even though it was never proven that a cow macro evolved into a whale.
But not in regards to macro evolution happening gradually over time through a series of microevolution when it cannot be observed and thus it can never be proven.
Their supposition that we are all related to all living things would presuppose that all living things should be able to mingle with our "former kinds", but we cannot. They argue for natural selection, but all the former kinds that we supposedly evolved from are still here but the kinds of the changes inbetween those kinds are conveniently selected for extinction?
That is why Punctuated Macroevolution or Rapid Macroevolution was proposed because Gradual Macroevolution cannot happen with such a huge gap in the fossil record, but evolutionists still argue for gradual macroevolution as if it is still true.
If you want to be specific about it, then you do so in running against the grain in His words that was already shown to you how God created everything to continue after its own kind, and that included the plants by its seeds.
Really? Proven? Then where are the labs that I can go to to get my pair of wings? If you say to me "Don't be silly," then that is what I say to you about evolution having been proven when they do not know the mechanism that causes it.
You have the genealogy in the Bible for an estimate on how old the earth is as Jesus has validated the first marriage derived from the creation of man and woman.
As for the oversight that all the millions of species can be on the ark, let's look at speciation events at this link:
Speciation and the Animals on the Ark | The Institute for Creation Research
This is quoted below from that site to prompt you to read about those speciation events as mentioned before that paragraph.
Really? Proven? Then where are the labs that I can go to to get my pair of wings? If you say to me "Don't be silly," then that is what I say to you about evolution having been proven when they do not know the mechanism that causes it.
You have the genealogy in the Bible for an estimate on how old the earth is as Jesus has validated the first marriage derived from the creation of man and woman.
As for the oversight that all the millions of species can be on the ark, let's look at speciation events at this link:
Speciation and the Animals on the Ark | The Institute for Creation Research
This is quoted below from that site to prompt you to read about those speciation events as mentioned before that paragraph.
I cannot find the word "continue", I only see that God created through waters and through earth various kinds of animals. I see no limitation in those kinds you seem to be seeing in something like if they would be locked.
Ah, proven is the word, not proved
Well, we, as lay persons, cannot see what is happening in labs daily. The last time I remember some mouse with human ear on its back, in news. But who knows what other strange/forbidden experiences are going on, unseen.
First, genealogies are to estimate the age of humanity, at best. Not the age of the Earth or of the Universe.
Second, genealogies in the Bible are frequently telescoped.
"Speciation" - interesting word. Something like "quick macroevolution"?
I am sorry, I admit I will not read the article, ICR is not trustworthy page for me and this is too long.
Ah, proven is the word, not proved
Well, we, as lay persons, cannot see what is happening in labs daily. The last time I remember some mouse with human ear on its back, in news. But who knows what other strange/forbidden experiences are going on, unseen.First, genealogies are to estimate the age of humanity, at best. Not the age of the Earth or of the Universe.
Second, genealogies in the Bible are frequently telescoped.
"Speciation" - interesting word. Something like "quick macroevolution"?
I am sorry, I admit I will not read the article, ICR is not trustworthy page for me and this is too long.
The Hebrew word Yom יֹם can mean: a day from evening to evening, an indefinite period of time, or an event.
In Ge 2:17
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
KJV
the intended sense of in the day that thou eatest thereof is in the event that you eat thereof. The premise is if you refrain from eating you will not die; but in the event that you eat you will die.
In Ge 2:17
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
KJV
the intended sense of in the day that thou eatest thereof is in the event that you eat thereof. The premise is if you refrain from eating you will not die; but in the event that you eat you will die.
The same regarding the "days" of Genesis 1.
But I am not sure what you think it should mean if not a literal day or a moment, when talking about Adam´s eating.
"In the indefinite period of time you will eat you will die"? Not making much sense to me...
"In the event you will eat" - ok, but it changes nothing, it should be immediate, the event was short.
Also, I think that Septuagint changes it a little:
"but in whatsoever day you eat of it, you will surely die."
But I am not sure what you think it should mean if not a literal day or a moment, when talking about Adam´s eating.
"In the indefinite period of time you will eat you will die"? Not making much sense to me...
"In the event you will eat" - ok, but it changes nothing, it should be immediate, the event was short.
Also, I think that Septuagint changes it a little:
"but in whatsoever day you eat of it, you will surely die."
Last edited:
The fallacy of your video is that it is like saying that a Jet engine evolved from a steam engine because if intrinsic similarities in their structure. As far as so called vestigial structures are concerned ; they are just as well explained as syylistic similarities of the same artist (God) working in the same medium (Creation); and they need not have any more significance than just that.
I consider this argument far more compelling: The genetic code of even the simplest life forms is very complex.
Basic foundational rules of mathematical analysis and probability demonstrate that information is not created by random events.
There is evidence for inter-generic hybridization within a family but there is absolutely no evidence for inter-familiar hybridation within an order so changes between classes within a phylum are preposterous.
I consider this argument far more compelling: The genetic code of even the simplest life forms is very complex.
Basic foundational rules of mathematical analysis and probability demonstrate that information is not created by random events.
There is evidence for inter-generic hybridization within a family but there is absolutely no evidence for inter-familiar hybridation within an order so changes between classes within a phylum are preposterous.
Try reading the scripture without believing that the evolution theory is true and unrefutable, then maybe He will help you to see that His words reproves the evolution theory for what it is; a false science.
You seem to not see what is meant by His words for why I had input the word continue, so I am going to ask you what God meant by the bold word.
Genesis 1:[SUP]24 [/SUP]And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.[SUP] 25 [/SUP]And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. KJV
Genesis 1:[SUP]11 [/SUP]And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.[SUP]12 [/SUP]And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:[SUP]20 [/SUP]And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.[SUP]21 [/SUP]And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. [SUP]22 [/SUP]And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
If the sea creatures were created before the land animals, then how can His words be true if a cow macroevolved into another kind; a whale? How can anything be true about mankind if the first creation of man and woman from which marriage had come from is a lie if they had evolved from a lesser life form? How can er believe Jesus in defending scripture for what marriage is if He lied about the first male & female created from which the first marriage was created by God by?
Regardless of the mad science, it is still by intelligent design but by sinful men. When God does it, it is good. Not in the process of becoming what He had intended that creation to be...but He said it was good before the fall of mankind ruined it.
Not to the length to believe the evolutionary timetable.. no siree.
Then I reckon the Bible is a untrustworthy thing to read for you as well. It is too bad we have to go to sites to disprove the evolution theory by science that you can check with yourself ( as we are to prove everything "christian" regardless by the scriptures, but as it is, you do not believe Moses's words; then neither will you believe His words.
John 5:[SUP]39 [/SUP]Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.[SUP]40 [/SUP]And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life...........[SUP]46 [/SUP]For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.[SUP] 47 [/SUP]But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
You seem to not see what is meant by His words for why I had input the word continue, so I am going to ask you what God meant by the bold word.
Genesis 1:[SUP]24 [/SUP]And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.[SUP] 25 [/SUP]And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. KJV
Genesis 1:[SUP]11 [/SUP]And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.[SUP]12 [/SUP]And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:[SUP]20 [/SUP]And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.[SUP]21 [/SUP]And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. [SUP]22 [/SUP]And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
If the sea creatures were created before the land animals, then how can His words be true if a cow macroevolved into another kind; a whale? How can anything be true about mankind if the first creation of man and woman from which marriage had come from is a lie if they had evolved from a lesser life form? How can er believe Jesus in defending scripture for what marriage is if He lied about the first male & female created from which the first marriage was created by God by?
Ah, proven is the word, not proved Well, we, as lay persons, cannot see what is happening in labs daily. The last time I remember some mouse with human ear on its back, in news. But who knows what other strange/forbidden experiences are going on, unseen.
Well, we, as lay persons, cannot see what is happening in labs daily. The last time I remember some mouse with human ear on its back, in news. But who knows what other strange/forbidden experiences are going on, unseen.
Not to the length to believe the evolutionary timetable.. no siree.
"Speciation" - interesting word. Something like "quick macroevolution"?
I am sorry, I admit I will not read the article, ICR is not trustworthy page for me and this is too long.
I am sorry, I admit I will not read the article, ICR is not trustworthy page for me and this is too long.
John 5:[SUP]39 [/SUP]Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.[SUP]40 [/SUP]And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life...........[SUP]46 [/SUP]For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.[SUP] 47 [/SUP]But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
You are presuming that evolution is in some way related to science.
I believe that evolution is far more related to the religion of secular humanism than to science; and when members of the so called scientific community promote it, they are motivated by religious rather than scientific concerns.
How else do you account for at least three Nobel lauriets in bio-chemistry, chemistry, and physics being creationists.
I believe that evolution is far more related to the religion of secular humanism than to science; and when members of the so called scientific community promote it, they are motivated by religious rather than scientific concerns.
How else do you account for at least three Nobel lauriets in bio-chemistry, chemistry, and physics being creationists.
Compare the warning to what had happened afterwards.
Genesis 2:[SUP]16 [/SUP]And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:[SUP]17 [/SUP]But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 3:[SUP]6 [/SUP]And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.[SUP] 7 [/SUP]And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
It is about gaining the knowledge of good and evil. and by gaining that knowledge of sin is how death came that day into mankind and into the world. You can't say that he did not die because Adam & Eve had died, but to say it will happen that day, is to not understand the ramification of gaining the knowledge of good and evil.
The Lord provided coverings for them that day testifies to death would be coming just as any poison will bring about death, but they had started to die that day when they had sinned against the Lord.
Genesis 2:[SUP]16 [/SUP]And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:[SUP]17 [/SUP]But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Genesis 3:[SUP]6 [/SUP]And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.[SUP] 7 [/SUP]And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
It is about gaining the knowledge of good and evil. and by gaining that knowledge of sin is how death came that day into mankind and into the world. You can't say that he did not die because Adam & Eve had died, but to say it will happen that day, is to not understand the ramification of gaining the knowledge of good and evil.
The Lord provided coverings for them that day testifies to death would be coming just as any poison will bring about death, but they had started to die that day when they had sinned against the Lord.
The fact that the Bible describes the behemoth in Job 40 as a dinosaur when its tail is like a cedar which is a tree, and its genitals were inside as warped in its muscles which scientists has now "discovered" as being the truth, then every christian should hang up the biggest fattest lie in the world which is the evolution theory because those men are fumbling around in the dark using the bifocals of the evolution theory as if everything should be seen in that light rather than the word of God.
Its quite exhausting to react to such long posts, I propose to make it shorter... So, lets take one point or one question.
BTW, I was young earth creationist (and charismatic) for about 15 years. I really do not have problem with "never reading the Bible without the evolution idea in mind". Its only my late development (2 years or so). And I do not even say it must be so.
BTW, I was young earth creationist (and charismatic) for about 15 years. I really do not have problem with "never reading the Bible without the evolution idea in mind". Its only my late development (2 years or so). And I do not even say it must be so.
Breed is not species.
Dog is one species. Cat another. Pinguin another. Kangaroo another.
"A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring."
- so, according to your vocabulary, its what you probably call a "kind".
And there is about 9 million of species, or "kinds".
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110823180459.htm
Dog is one species. Cat another. Pinguin another. Kangaroo another.
"A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms in which two individuals can produce fertile offspring."
- so, according to your vocabulary, its what you probably call a "kind".
And there is about 9 million of species, or "kinds".
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110823180459.htm
Last edited: