Christian Forums

Quote from: Amo on Sun Apr 25, 2021 - 10:56:41
Twisted is, as twisted does.

I don't think you intend to do it.   You just don't know very much about biology, and so you're easy prey for those guys who go quote-mining for stuff they think might disprove science.   Like the reduced genetic variation in late mammoth populations.   As you were surprised to learn, all greatly reduced populations have reduced genetic variation.    It's a consequence, not a cause of smaller populations.

You are creating your own narrative again and reversing things in your own mind, then presenting them as science.   Creationists are unhappy with a God great and wise enough to create new species by natural means.   Cause they'd rather have a weaker God than have evolution. 

QuoteWhat difference does it make concerning a designers smarts, or intelligence, whether they choose rapid or slowly developing design?

Being mere humans, we can only design.   God is the Creator, and simply created the universe to bring forth life as He made it to do.

Genesis 1:24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done.

QuoteDo you think the scientists who discovered this complexity believe God directed it?

Darwin did:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1872

So does Francis Collins, Director of NIH.  So it's an old and continuing tradition to have faith in God as Creator, not mere "designer."

Your creationist faith would not exist without all the YE creationists who worked on denying God's power.  Why do you place so much faith in their "wisdom"?

As Paul points out in Romans 1:20:

For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

It's what Darwin wrote about the Creator.   Why not just set aside the "wisdom" of men, and let it be God's way?

Apparently, right.  Osnabrück Zoo in Germany.   
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pizzly-bears-polar-grizzly-real/

As the climate warms up, polar bears have to stay ashore longer, and are now encountering grizzly bears.  And Canada is seeing more and more pizzley bears.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Apr 27, 2021 - 09:23:01
Apparently, right.  Osnabrück Zoo in Germany.   
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pizzly-bears-polar-grizzly-real/

As the climate warms up, polar bears have to stay ashore longer, and are now encountering grizzly bears.  And Canada is seeing more and more pizzley bears.

Boys will be boys 

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Apr 27, 2021 - 09:23:01
Apparently, right.  Osnabrück Zoo in Germany.   
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pizzly-bears-polar-grizzly-real/
As the climate warms up, polar bears have to stay ashore longer, and are now encountering grizzly bears.  And Canada is seeing more and more pizzley bears.

Would this not affect the Kodiak bears as well?

Quote from: Rella on Tue Apr 27, 2021 - 11:03:56
Boys will be boys 

You betcha.

Quote from: DaveW on Tue Apr 27, 2021 - 11:12:15
Would this not affect the Kodiak bears as well?

This guy says no.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moYmLXye42M&ab_channel=WildCiencias

He's got a good British accent, so he must be right.

Quote from: DaveW on Tue Apr 27, 2021 - 11:12:15
Would this not affect the Kodiak bears as well?

Kodiaks are supposedly a subspecies of grizzly bears.    Big ones.  Nearly as big as polar bears.   But yes, it would if polar bears happened to roam there.   I don't think they are doing that now.

Edit: Polar bears evolved from brown bears very recently, around the beginning of the last ice age.   They look a lot different than brown bears, and have lots of adaptations for a polar marine environment, but they are just barely genetically different to be considered a different species.

Quote from: Rella on Tue Apr 27, 2021 - 11:03:56
Boys will be boys 

And girls will be girls, I suppose.   That's how it usually works.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Apr 28, 2021 - 15:44:08
Kodiaks are supposedly a subspecies of grizzly bears.    Big ones.  Nearly as big as polar bears.   But yes, it would if polar bears happened to roam there.   I don't think they are doing that now.

More recent studies have Polar Bears as a color variant of Kodiaks.

Quote from: DaveW on Thu Apr 29, 2021 - 05:31:36
More recent studies have Polar Bears as a color variant of Kodiaks.

Are you sure?

Polar bears have bigger feet, smaller but harder claws, thicker fur, and are carnivores.

Kodiak bears have bigger skulls, different musculature in their back, and are omnivores.

(That British voice guy... he seems legit)

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Thu Apr 29, 2021 - 13:09:31
Are you sure?

Polar bears have bigger feet, smaller but harder claws, thicker fur, and are carnivores.

Kodiak bears have bigger skulls, different musculature in their back, and are omnivores.

(That British voice guy... he seems legit)

Since the hybrid offspring of a grizzly and polar bear (whether pizzly or grolar) is fertile, I wouldn't consider them a separate species.

Wolves and dogs were considered separate species at one time, but no longer.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Apr 28, 2021 - 15:45:23
And girls will be girls, I suppose.   That's how it usually works.

You're not supposed to use gender specific terms.

Quote from: mommydi on Thu Apr 29, 2021 - 13:37:00
You're not supposed to use gender specific terms.

My preferred pronoun is "your highness."  I expect you all to use that from now on.

QuoteI don't think you intend to do it.   You just don't know very much about biology, and so you're easy prey for those guys who go quote-mining for stuff they think might disprove science.   Like the reduced genetic variation in late mammoth populations.   As you were surprised to learn, all greatly reduced populations have reduced genetic variation.    It's a consequence, not a cause of smaller populations.

You are creating your own narrative again and reversing things in your own mind, then presenting them as science.   Creationists are unhappy with a God great and wise enough to create new species by natural means.   Cause they'd rather have a weaker God than have evolution.

It is not hard to go quote mining for statements from evolutionary "scientists" of the past, who were wrong, so many as there are. Such does not of course prove science wrong, just the false theories declared by some professed scientists. As far as reduced populations having reduced variation, that is basic math, not brilliant scientific observation. Nor is such conducive obviously, to the theory of evolution unless God directed and designed of course. As apart from such , evolution requires a beginning with the lowest levels of population and variation of anything, let alone genetics. Such transforming into everything we see over countless ions of time. As though time itself could bring such about.

Creationists do not create things in their own minds, but rather take the simple word of God to mean just what it says. Building upon the same. Evolutionists are the one's postulating completely outside of biblical testimony. They are the ones dependent upon an allegorical or symbolic interpretation of scripture to back up their "sciences" which scripture nowhere supports or suggests but by personal preference of the same. Allegories and symbols by the way, which they cannot and do not explain, but only refer too.

Creationists do take the extreme lack of evidence revealing evolution of one species into another, as a sign that such has not and does not happen. While evolutionists ever strive to prove the same. Even if they do eventually come up with very good evidence of the same, it will simply mean that God allowed for, or designed such. It will never add up to or equal countless ions of time regarding slowly developing life from simple to complex, over and above creation in six days as the bible simply states.

QuoteBeing mere humans, we can only design.   God is the Creator, and simply created the universe to bring forth life as He made it to do.

Yes He did, which no Creationist refutes. The time, method, and duration of the above is the dispute.

QuoteDarwin did:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1872

So does Francis Collins, Director of NIH.  So it's an old and continuing tradition to have faith in God as Creator, not mere "designer."

Your creationist faith would not exist without all the YE creationists who worked on denying God's power.  Why do you place so much faith in their "wisdom"?

As Paul points out in Romans 1:20:

For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

It's what Darwin wrote about the Creator.   Why not just set aside the "wisdom" of men, and let it be God's way?

News flash Barb, Darwin and Francis Collins are men, not God. You apparently beleive they have more insight into how God created this planet and the life upon it than Moses had. Do they claim to be God's chosen prophet as Moses was? Are they new prophets able to expound and explain what Moses really meant when writing the Genesis account? If so, please do expound and give their testimonies regarding the same, in light of Moses' Genesis account. Thank you.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

I ask again, as I have repeatedly on these boards, please do explain your evolutionary theory in light of and by the correct instruction of the Holy scriptures. If you cannot, then how do you claim your theory to be of God. Since Creationists can, how say you they are wrong, and that they and not you, deny God's power?

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 01, 2021 - 10:21:56

I ask again, as I have repeatedly on these boards, please do explain your evolutionary theory in light of and by the correct instruction of the Holy scriptures. If you cannot, then how do you claim your theory to be of God. Since Creationists can, how say you they are wrong, and that they and not you, deny God's power?

Do you really believe that all knowledge of the physical world is limited to what can be read in the Holy Scriptures?

https://earth-chronicles.com/science/what-is-the-most-complex-robot-on-earth.html

Interesting article, with some videos regarding complex robots. If anyone ever suggested robots like this with some kind of built in self regenerating power supply just formed over a long period of time as evolutionists believe all life did, they would be laughed to scorn, and rightly so. Go figure.

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 01, 2021 - 10:29:19
Do you really believe that all knowledge of the physical world is limited to what can be read in the Holy Scriptures?

What makes you ask such a question? I certainly never said that.

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 01, 2021 - 10:29:19

Quote from: Amo on Today at 10:21:56

QuoteI ask again, as I have repeatedly on these boards, please do explain your evolutionary theory in light of and by the correct instruction of the Holy scriptures. If you cannot, then how do you claim your theory to be of God. Since Creationists can, how say you they are wrong, and that they and not you, deny God's power?

Do you really believe that all knowledge of the physical world is limited to what can be read in the Holy Scriptures?

I do not read him saying anything of the kind, nor has he ever.

But too many seem only too happy to veer away from the Holy Scriptures with links and graphs that tend to lead away from God's ability to have done it all. And within those links there are always references to this scientist or that scientist and never a mention of the creator .

We all know that there are no technical instructions in the Holy Book. But the would be teachers of said technicalities
only every use their science for explanation leaving the creator out of the mix.

It should be done...

It has been written .... whatever.

This is one theory on what went on.

Do you really believe that all knowledge of the physical world is limited to what can be read in the Holy Scriptures?

Quote from: Rella on Sat May 01, 2021 - 11:34:34
I do not read him saying anything of the kind, nor has he ever.

I think Amo sometimes gets excited and things he imagines are confused with things he's really seen.

QuoteBut too many seem only too happy to veer away from the Holy Scriptures with links and graphs that tend to lead away from God's ability to have done it all.

Studying nature just gives us some of the details.   As St. Paul says:

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

From those graphs and charts, a believer merely learns the details of His creation.   And trust me on this, it's even more awesome than you might think.   

QuoteAnd within those links there are always references to this scientist or that scientist and never a mention of the creator .

Not so much to the scientist, as the facts that scientists have discovered. And much of it is an illumination of His creation.

QuoteWe all know that there are no technical instructions in the Holy Book. But the would be teachers of said technicalities
only every use their science for explanation leaving the creator out of the mix.

Science can only look at His creation; it's too weak a method to address the supernatural.   But nothing else we can do, works as well for learning about what He has done in this world.   And yes, you can ignore the implications and just dwell on the details.   But those who deny what His creation shows us of him, be they creationists or atheists, are without excuse.

Fortunately, it's not a salvation issue, so long as you do accept Him as Creator.   Creationists are no less Christians than the rest of us, so long as they don't make an idol of their new doctrines.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 01, 2021 - 10:34:00
What makes you ask such a question? I certainly never said that.

You seem to think that about evolution; I was just curious if you thought that about everything physical. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYbgQvJ4pt8

Good video about the effect of the book of Genesis upon one's perception or views of time, history, and science.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Sat May 01, 2021 - 11:47:21
Do you really believe that all knowledge of the physical world is limited to what can be read in the Holy Scriptures?

I think Amo sometimes gets excited and things he imagines are confused with things he's really seen.

Studying nature just gives us some of the details.   As St. Paul says:

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

From those graphs and charts, a believer merely learns the details of His creation.   And trust me on this, it's even more awesome than you might think.   

Not so much to the scientist, as the facts that scientists have discovered. And much of it is an illumination of His creation.

Science can only look at His creation; it's too weak a method to address the supernatural.   But nothing else we can do, works as well for learning about what He has done in this world.   And yes, you can ignore the implications and just dwell on the details.   But those who deny what His creation shows us of him, be they creationists or atheists, are without excuse.

Fortunately, it's not a salvation issue, so long as you do accept Him as Creator.   Creationists are no less Christians than the rest of us, so long as they don't make an idol of their new doctrines.

As we have all learned, what you think, and what is, are often two very different things. Much of what scientists throughout history have thought, taught, graphed, and charted determining what is as well, was and is not.

My consistent testimony on these boards for many years now, questioning and refuting the supposed science of evolution, is no momentary display of excitement or confusion. It is the determined expression of my faith in the word of God above and beyond the "scientific" theories of humanity. Whether those professing them consider themsleves to be Christian or not.

Studying nature gives us a great many details, none of which point to gradual simple to complex evolution but in the minds of those who desire it to be so. Such is simply another faith some have chosen to beleive and defend.

I have already proved you the liar in declaring Creationists as the progenitors of new doctrine, shall we go through the facts concerning the same again?

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: 10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Did God contradict His own creative power when He spoke the above audibly to the entire nation of Israel, and wrote it with His own finger twice in stone? If not, then why would Creationists be denying that power in believing the same? If so, have you not called God a liar, or the scriptures above to be false? The rejection of all and any truth, is most definitely a salvific issue. All who do such, will be sent strong delusion from God Himself.

2Th 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: 9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Rejecting the truth, is believing in lies. The evil one is the father of lies, and all who reject truth ad believe lies, take pleasure in unrighteousness, and are lost.

Quote from: 4WD on Sat May 01, 2021 - 12:19:46
You seem to think that about evolution; I was just curious if you thought that about everything physical.

Evolution is not physical, it is a theory which exists in the mind of evolutionists alone, by faith in their theory. They use "science" to support their faith. Just as Creationists can and do use "science" as well to support their faith. Each determining the science of the other to be faulty, according to their faiths.

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 01, 2021 - 14:08:59
Evolution is not physical...

It certainly isn't spiritual, so it must be physical.

QuoteEvolution is not physical, it is a theory which exists in the mind of evolutionists alone, by faith in their theory. They use "science" to support their faith. Just as Creationists can and do use "science" as well to support their faith. Each determining the science of the other to be faulty, according to their faiths.

If you think so, you've been fooled.   Biological evolution is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time.  Completely physical, by definition.

Perhaps people told you it was something else.   What do you think it is?

Quote from: Amo on Sat May 01, 2021 - 14:01:13I have already proved you the liar in declaring Creationists as the progenitors of new doctrine, shall we go through the facts concerning the same again?

I've already shown you the fact that YE creationism is no older than the last century.   There are certainly creationists who do not deny the fact of great age of the Earth.  Many of them accept the observed fact of evolution.   But let's show everyone again:

From the mid-nineteenth century through the mid-twentieth century (roughly 1860 to 1960), most conservative Protestant writers in the United States accepted the validity of an old earth and universe. This is reflected in the notes to Genesis One in the Scofield Reference Bible (1909), which was very widely used by conservative Protestants in North America and England for decades. I will say more about this in my next column; for the time being, please accept it as a fact.

Many conservative Protestant writers also believed that Noah's flood had been geographically localized, covering part of the ancient Near East but not the whole globe, an interpretation popularized by the English abolitionist theologian John Pye Smith. Most writers in this period believed that the flood did not have very much geological significance, whether or not it was "local." In short, they did not believe in Flood Geology.

During this period, belief in the combination of a young earth and Flood Geology was prominent only among fringe groups such as the Seventh-day Adventists, who followed the creationist views of prophetess Ellen G. White. She claimed to have experienced trance-like "visions" in which God revealed various truths to her. Describing a vision about the creation week, she wrote about how she was "carried back to the creation and was shown that that the first week, in which God performed the work of creation in six days and rested on the seventh day, was just like every other week." (This connects closely with Adventist teaching about Saturday worship.)

White's ideas were later popularized by another Adventist, the Canadian schoolteacher George McCready Price, who wrote dozens of books over six decades. Price was inspired by White's "revealing word pictures of the Edenic beginning of the world, of the fall and the world apostasy, and of the flood." The more he delved into White, the more he saw a need to spread her ideas and to combat what he regarded as the godless theory of evolution.
...
Significantly, fundamentalist leaders admired Price's opposition to evolution, but not his defense of a young earth and Flood Geology. Like Bryan, they accepted an old earth and the extinction of many animals long before humans existed. The testimony of Baptist preacher William Bell Riley, founding president of the World Christian Fundamentals Association, is quite revealing: he could not identify a single "intelligent fundamentalist who claims that the earth was made six thousand years ago; and the Bible never taught any such thing." (Quoted by Ronald Numbers, The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, 2006, p. 60.)
...
Indeed, commitment to a young earth and Flood Geology remained on the periphery of fundamentalism until the publication of The Genesis Flood, by John C. Whitcomb and Henry Morris, in 1961. Morris had already endorsed Price's ideas in a book, That You Might Believe (1946), which Morris later described as "the first book published since the Scopes trial in which a scientist from a secular university advocated recent special creation and a worldwide flood." Several years later, after Whitcomb heard Morris speak, Whitcomb decided to base his doctoral dissertation on Price's young earth and Flood Geology, leading to the jointly written book that launched the modern creationist movement and made Scientific Creationism the generally received view among fundamentalists and many conservative evangelicals today.
https://biologos.org/series/science-and-the-bible/articles/young-earth-scientific-creationism-history-and-beliefs

Biologos BTW, was founded by Francis Collins, a world-class scientist, an evangelical Christian, the director of the Human Genome Project, and currently director of National Institute of Health.

If you asserted that Jesus, when He told parables, was a liar, you'd be doing the same thing to Jesus as you would be doing to God the Father with regard to creation.   I don't think you intended to call God a liar, or claim scripture to be false, but that's what it looks like to many Christians.   

QuoteThe rejection of all and any truth, is most definitely a salvific issue.

Not according to Jesus.   He makes it very clear what determines your eternal home, and your opinion of evolution isn't one of them.   For which you should be very, very grateful.  Read the details in Matthew 25:31-46.    It could be really important for you.   You're denying the word of God here.

QuoteAll who do such, will be sent strong delusion from God Himself.

QuoteRejecting the truth, is believing in lies.

Fortunately, He won't decide your eternal home based on you believing the lie of YE creationism.   That's not how you will be judged.   But you are very close to making an idol of your new doctrine, and that could endanger your salvation.   Don't do that.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Sat May 01, 2021 - 18:22:36
If you think so, you've been fooled.   Biological evolution is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time.  Completely physical, by definition.

Perhaps people told you it was something else.   What do you think it is?

Why direct that at me?

Quote from: 4WD on Sun May 02, 2021 - 04:43:31
Why direct that at me?

Because I messed up?    Sorry.   I know you know better.   I'll go back and fix it.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Sat May 01, 2021 - 18:22:36


If you think so, you've been fooled.   Biological evolution is a change in allele frequencies in a population over time.  Completely physical, by definition.

Perhaps people told you it was something else.   What do you think it is?

No, biological evolution is a theory about change. One that changes itself very often. Defining theories are not physical. They are attempted explanations of what is physical, how the physical came about and or changes over time. That is all.

Quote from: Amo on Sun May 02, 2021 - 09:48:26
No, biological evolution is a theory about change.

Change in allele frequency in a population over time.   Physical changes.    This is why you got it all wrong.   It's about something observable in the world at all times.   No point in denying the fact.

QuoteOne that changes itself very often.

Like chemistry, physics, geology, and all other sciences.   As we learn more, we refine theories.   Sometimes, as in chemistry and geology, we have to replace the theory entirely.   But that's not the case in evolutionary science.    Darwin's original definition, "descent with modification" still holds true today.   But things like genetics, molecular biology, and information theory have greatly refined and improved his theory.   As you learned earlier, the basic points of Darwinian theory are still as they were in Darwin's time.   Would you like me to show you that, again?

QuoteDefining theories are not physical.

You've confused the natural phenomenon (change in allele frequency) with evolutionary theory, which explains how it works.    Geology is like that too.   Plate tectonics is the theory that explains moving continents, which is the physical phenomenon.

Plate tectonics and evolutionary theory are theories because they are supported by a great deal of evidence.   Remember what a theory is?   "An idea or group of ideas that has been repeatedly verified by evidence."

Quote from: The Barbarian on Sat May 01, 2021 - 20:35:35
I've already shown you the fact that YE creationism is no older than the last century.   There are certainly creationists who do not deny the fact of great age of the Earth.  Many of them accept the observed fact of evolution.   But let's show everyone again:

From the mid-nineteenth century through the mid-twentieth century (roughly 1860 to 1960), most conservative Protestant writers in the United States accepted the validity of an old earth and universe. This is reflected in the notes to Genesis One in the Scofield Reference Bible (1909), which was very widely used by conservative Protestants in North America and England for decades. I will say more about this in my next column; for the time being, please accept it as a fact.

Many conservative Protestant writers also believed that Noah's flood had been geographically localized, covering part of the ancient Near East but not the whole globe, an interpretation popularized by the English abolitionist theologian John Pye Smith. Most writers in this period believed that the flood did not have very much geological significance, whether or not it was "local." In short, they did not believe in Flood Geology.

During this period, belief in the combination of a young earth and Flood Geology was prominent only among fringe groups such as the Seventh-day Adventists, who followed the creationist views of prophetess Ellen G. White. She claimed to have experienced trance-like "visions" in which God revealed various truths to her. Describing a vision about the creation week, she wrote about how she was "carried back to the creation and was shown that that the first week, in which God performed the work of creation in six days and rested on the seventh day, was just like every other week." (This connects closely with Adventist teaching about Saturday worship.)

White's ideas were later popularized by another Adventist, the Canadian schoolteacher George McCready Price, who wrote dozens of books over six decades. Price was inspired by White's "revealing word pictures of the Edenic beginning of the world, of the fall and the world apostasy, and of the flood." The more he delved into White, the more he saw a need to spread her ideas and to combat what he regarded as the godless theory of evolution.
...
Significantly, fundamentalist leaders admired Price's opposition to evolution, but not his defense of a young earth and Flood Geology. Like Bryan, they accepted an old earth and the extinction of many animals long before humans existed. The testimony of Baptist preacher William Bell Riley, founding president of the World Christian Fundamentals Association, is quite revealing: he could not identify a single "intelligent fundamentalist who claims that the earth was made six thousand years ago; and the Bible never taught any such thing." (Quoted by Ronald Numbers, The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, 2006, p. 60.)
...
Indeed, commitment to a young earth and Flood Geology remained on the periphery of fundamentalism until the publication of The Genesis Flood, by John C. Whitcomb and Henry Morris, in 1961. Morris had already endorsed Price's ideas in a book, That You Might Believe (1946), which Morris later described as "the first book published since the Scopes trial in which a scientist from a secular university advocated recent special creation and a worldwide flood." Several years later, after Whitcomb heard Morris speak, Whitcomb decided to base his doctoral dissertation on Price's young earth and Flood Geology, leading to the jointly written book that launched the modern creationist movement and made Scientific Creationism the generally received view among fundamentalists and many conservative evangelicals today.
https://biologos.org/series/science-and-the-bible/articles/young-earth-scientific-creationism-history-and-beliefs

Biologos BTW, was founded by Francis Collins, a world-class scientist, an evangelical Christian, the director of the Human Genome Project, and currently director of National Institute of Health.

If you asserted that Jesus, when He told parables, was a liar, you'd be doing the same thing to Jesus as you would be doing to God the Father with regard to creation.   I don't think you intended to call God a liar, or claim scripture to be false, but that's what it looks like to many Christians.   

Not according to Jesus.   He makes it very clear what determines your eternal home, and your opinion of evolution isn't one of them.   For which you should be very, very grateful.  Read the details in Matthew 25:31-46.    It could be really important for you.   You're denying the word of God here.

Fortunately, He won't decide your eternal home based on you believing the lie of YE creationism.   That's not how you will be judged.   But you are very close to making an idol of your new doctrine, and that could endanger your salvation.   Don't do that.

More Barb malarky which exists only within your own mind. You attempted to foist this lie upon me and others once before, which I addressed and proved wrong already. Again though, we can go through this again if you wish. The scriptures themselves of course refute your above lying testimony, which scriptures you and I and all will be judged by. But you already know this truth, you simply reject it. So we will move on to the testimony of your "church fathers" who believed what you say is new. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine.

QuoteTHE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS - [A.D. 100.]

CHAPTER 15

THE FALSE AND THE TRUE SABBATH

Further, also, it is written concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue which [the Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai, "And sanctify ye the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart." And He says in another place, "If my sons keep the Sabbath, then will I cause my mercy to rest upon them." The Sabbath is mentioned at the beginning of the creation [thus]: "And God made in six days the works of His hands, and made an end on the seventh day, and rested on it, and sanctified it." Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, "He finished in six
days." This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with Him a thousand years. And He Himself testifieth, saying, "Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years." Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. "And He rested on the seventh day." This meaneth: when His Son, coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day.


IRENAEUS AGAINST HERESIES - [A.D. 120-202.]

BOOK 5

CHAPTER 28

THE DISTINCTION TO BE MADE BETWEEN THE RIGHTEOUS AND THE WICKED. THE FUTURE APOSTASY IN THE TIME OF ANTI-CHRIST, AND THE END OF THE WORLD

3. For in as many days as this world was made, in so many thousand years shall it be concluded. And for this reason the Scripture says: "Thus the heaven and the earth were finished, and all their adornment. And God brought to a conclusion upon the sixth day the works that He had made; and God rested upon the seventh day from all His works." This is an account of the things formerly created, as also it is a prophecy of what is to come. For the day of the Lord is as a thousand years; and in six days created things were completed: it is evident, therefore, that they will come to an end at the sixth thousand year.


CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA - [A.D. 153-193-217]

THE STROMATA,
OR MISCELLANIES

BOOK 6

CHAPTER 16
GNOSTIC EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE

Wherefore Solomon also says, that before heaven, and earth, and all existences, Wisdom had arisen in the Almighty; the participation of which — that which is by power, I mean, not that by essence — teaches a man to know by apprehension things divine and human. Having reached this point, we must mention these things by the way; since the discourse has turned on the seventh and the eighth. For the eighth may possibly turn out to be properly the seventh, and the seventh manifestly the sixth, and the latter properly the Sabbath, and the seventh a day of work. For the creation of the world was concluded in six days. For the motion of the sun from solstice to solstice is completed in six months — in the course of which, at one time the leaves fall, and at another plants bud and seeds
come to maturity.


ORIGEN DE PRINCIPIIS - [A.D. 185-230-254]

BOOK 4

TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN OF RUFINUS

CHAPTER 1

12. This point, indeed, is not to be passed by without notice, viz., that there are certain passages of Scripture where this "body," as we termed it, i.e., this inferential historical sense, is not always found, as we shall prove to be the case in the following pages, but where that which we termed "soul" or "spirit" can only be understood. And this, I think, is indicated in the Gospels, where there are said to be placed, according to the manner of purification among the Jews, six water-vessels, containing two or three firkins apiece; by which, as I have said, the language of the Gospel seems
to indicate, with respect to those who are secretly called by the apostle "Jews," that they are purified by the word of Scripture, — receiving indeed sometimes two firkins, i.e., the understanding of the "soul" or "spirit," according to our statement as above; sometimes even three (firkins), when in the reading (of Scripture) the "bodily" sense, which is
the "historical," may be preserved for the edification of the people. Now six water-vessels are appropriately spoken of, with regard to those persons who are purified by being placed in the world; for we read that in six days — which is the perfect number — this world and all things in it were finished. How great, then, is the utility of this first "historical" sense which we have mentioned, is attested by the multitude of all believers, who believe with adequate faith and simplicity, and does not need much argument, because it is openly manifest to all; whereas of that sense which we have called above the "soul," as it were, of Scripture,


THE EXTANT WORKS AND FRAGMENTS
OF HIPPOLYTUS - [A.D. 170-236] The first great Christian Father whose history is Roman is, nevertheless, not a Roman, but a Greek. He is the disciple of Irenaeus, and the spirit of his life-work reflects that of his master.

[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. S. D. F. SALMOND]
PART 1 — EXEGETICAL

ON DANIEL 2

THE INTERPRETATION BY HIPPOLYTUS, (BISHOP) OF ROME,
OF THE VISIONS OF DANIEL AND NEBUCHADNEZZAR,
TAKEN IN CONJUNCTION

And 6,000 years must needs be accomplished, in order that the Sabbath may come, the rest, the holy day "on which God rested from all His works." For the Sabbath is the type and emblem of the future kingdom of the saints, when they "shall reign with Christ," when He comes from heaven, as John says in his Apocalypse: for "a day with the Lord is as a thousand years." Since, then, in six days God made all things, it follows that 6,000 years must be fulfilled. And they are not yet fulfilled, as John says: "five are fallen; one is," that is, the sixth; "the other is not yet come."


ARCHELAUS - (A.D. 277.)

[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. S. D. F. SALMOND, M.A.]

THE ACTS OF THE DISPUTATION WITH THE HERESIARCH MANES.

31. Listen also to what I have to say on this other expression which has been adduced, viz., "Christ, who redeemed us from the curse of the law." My view of this passage is that Moses, that illustrious servant of God, committed to those who wished to have the right vision, an emblematic law, and also a real law. Thus, to take an example, after God had made the world, and all things that are in it, in the space of six days, He rested on the seventh day from all His works by which statement I do not mean to affirm that He rested because He was fatigued, but that He did so as having brought to its perfection every creature which He had resolved to introduce. And yet in the sequel it, the new law, says: "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." Does that mean, then, that He is still making heaven, or sun, or man, or animals, or trees, or any such thing? Nay; but the meaning is, that when these visible objects were perfectly finished, He rested from that kind of work; while, however, He still continues to work at objects invisible with an inward mode of action, and saves men.


METHODIUS - (A.D. 260-312).

[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. WILLIAM R. CLARK, M.A., VICAR OF ST. MARY MAGDALEN, TAUNTON.]

DISCOURSE 7

CHAPTER 5
THE SIXTY QUEENS: WHY SIXTY, AND WHY QUEENS; THE EXCELLENCE OF THE SAINTS OF THE FIRST AGE

In addition to these matters, there is this also to be considered, so that nothing may escape us of things which are necessary, why He said that the queens were sixty, and the concubines eighty, and the virgins so numerous as not to be counted from their multitude, but the spouse one. And first let us speak of the sixty. I imagine that He named under the sixty queens, those who had pleased God from the first-made man in succession to Noah, for this reason, since these had no need of precepts and laws for their salvation, the creation of the world in six days being still recent. For they remembered that in six days God formed the creation, and those things which were made in paradise; and how man, receiving a command not to touch the tree of knowledge, ran aground, the author of evil having led him astray.


DISCOURSE 8

CHAPTER 8
THE FAITHFUL IN BAPTISM MALES, CONFIGURED TO CHRIST; THE SAINTS THEMSELVES CHRISTS

Moreover, it is evident that the creation of the world was accomplished in harmony with this number, God having made heaven and earth, and the things which are in them, in six days; the word of creative power containing the number six, in accordance with which the Trinity is the maker of bodies. For length, and breadth, and depth make up a body. And the number six is composed of triangles. On these subjects, however, there is not sufficient time at present to enlarge with accuracy, for fear of letting the main subject slip, in considering that which is secondary.


DISCOURSE 9

TUSIANE

CHAPTER 1

For since in six days God made the heaven and the earth, and finished the whole world, and rested on the seventh day from all His works which He had made, and blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, so by a figure in the seventh month, when the fruits of the earth have been gathered in, we are commanded to keep the feast to the Lord, which signifies that, when this world shall be terminated at the seventh thousand years, when God shall have completed the world, He shall rejoice in us.


LACTANTIUS - (A.D. 260-330.)

[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. WILLIAM FLETCHER, D.D.]

THE DIVINE INSTITUTES

BOOK 7
OF A HAPPY LIFE

CHAPTER 13
OF THE SOUL, AND THE TESTIMONIES CONCERNING ITS ETERNITY

But we, whom the Holy Scriptures instruct to the knowledge of the truth, know the beginning and the end of
the world, respecting which we will now speak in the end of our work, since we have explained respecting the beginning in the second book. Therefore let the philosophers, who enumerate thousands of ages from the
beginning of the world, know that the six thousandth year is not yet completed, and that when this number is completed the consummation must take place, and the condition of human affairs be remodeled for the
better, the proof of which must first be related, that the matter itself may be plain. God completed the world and this admirable work of nature in the space of six days, as is contained in the secrets of Holy Scripture, and
consecrated the seventh day, on which He had rested from His works. But this is the Sabbath-day, which in the language of the Hebrews received its name from the number, whence the seventh is the legitimate and complete
number. For there are seven days, by the revolutions of which in order the circles of years are made up; and there are seven stars which do not set, and seven luminaries which are called planets, whose differing and unequal movements are believed to cause the varieties of circumstances and times. Therefore, since all the works of God were completed in six days, the world must continue in its present state through six ages, that is, six thousand years. For the great day of God is limited by a circle of a thousand years, as the prophet shows, who says "In Thy sight, O Lord, a thousand years are as one day." And as God labored during those six days in creating such great works, so His religion and truth must labor during these six thousand years, while wickedness prevails and bears rule. And again, since God, having finished His works, rested the seventh day and blessed it, at the end of the six thousandth year all wickedness must be abolished from the earth, and righteousness reign for a thousand years; and there must be tranquillity and rest from the labors which the world now has long endured. But how that will come to pass I will explain in its order. We have often said that lesser things and things of small importance are figures and previous shadowings forth of great things; as this day of ours, which is bounded by the rising and the setting of the sun, is a representation of that great clay to which the circuit of a thousand years affixes its limits.


VICTORINUS

[TRANSLATED BY THE REV. ROBERT ERNEST WALLIS, PH.D.]

ON THE CREATION OF THE WORLD

To me, as I meditate and consider in my mind concerning the creation of this world in which we are kept enclosed, even such is the rapidity of that creation; as is contained in the book of Moses, which he wrote about its creation, and which is called Genesis. God produced that entire mass for the adornment of His majesty in six days; on the seventh to which He consecrated it... with a blessing. For this reason, therefore, because in the septenary number of days both heavenly and earthly things are ordered, in place of the beginning I will consider of this seventh day after the principle of all matters pertaining to the number of seven; and as far as I shall be able, I will endeavor to portray the day of the divine power to that consummation.


ORIGEN'S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

BY JOHN PATRICK, D.D.

BOOK 12

36

CONCERNING THE TRANSFIGURATION OF THE SAVIOR

"Now after six days," according to Matthew and Mark, "He taketh with him Peter and James and John his brother, and leads them up into a high mountain apart, and was transfigured before them." Now, also, let it be granted, before the exposition that occurs to us in relation to these things, that this took place long ago, and according to the letter. But it seems to me, that those who are led up by Jesus into the high mountain, and are deemed worthy of beholding His transfiguration apart, are not without purpose led up six days after the discourses previously spoken. For since
in six days — the perfect number — the whole world, — this perfect work of art, — was made, on this account I think that he who transcends all the things of the world by beholding no longer the things which are seen, for
they are temporal, but already the things which not seen, and only the things which are not seen, because that they are eternal, is represented in the words, "After six days days Jesus took up with Him" certain persons.

Now, as you have learned Barb, the belief in the creation of the world in six days as scripture itself testifies and a world that is only about six thousand years old, is not a new doctrine developed recently. Of course you may choose to ignore all of the above testimony, just as you ignore scripture. I'm sure there is plenty more than the above testifying to the falsity of your claim, which I will be happy to find and post as well if you wish.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Sun May 02, 2021 - 09:58:21
Change in allele frequency in a population over time.   Physical changes.    This is why you got it all wrong.   It's about something observable in the world at all times.   No point in denying the fact.

Like chemistry, physics, geology, and all other sciences.   As we learn more, we refine theories.   Sometimes, as in chemistry and geology, we have to replace the theory entirely.   But that's not the case in evolutionary science.    Darwin's original definition, "descent with modification" still holds true today.   But things like genetics, molecular biology, and information theory have greatly refined and improved his theory.   As you learned earlier, the basic points of Darwinian theory are still as they were in Darwin's time.   Would you like me to show you that, again?

You've confused the natural phenomenon (change in allele frequency) with evolutionary theory, which explains how it works.    Geology is like that too.   Plate tectonics is the theory that explains moving continents, which is the physical phenomenon.

Plate tectonics and evolutionary theory are theories because they are supported by a great deal of evidence.   Remember what a theory is?   "An idea or group of ideas that has been repeatedly verified by evidence."

To the contrary, there are very good reasons to deny your delusions and word play. As I have, do, and will continue to do.

Quote from: Amo on Sun May 02, 2021 - 10:50:09Now, as you have learned Barb, the belief in the creation of the world in six days as scripture itself testifies

As you know, scripture itself says that the "yom" of the creation story are not literal days, since it's absurd to talk of literal mornings and evenings with no sun to have them.   So there's no way to revise it to a literal six days.

Quoteand a world that is only about six thousand years old, is not a new doctrine developed recently.

We're speaking of YE creationism, which is much more than the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old.   

QuoteOf course you may choose to ignore all of the evidence I showed you, just as you ignore scripture when it isn't consistent with things you want to be true.   

    Change in allele frequency in a population over time.   Physical changes.    This is why you got it all wrong.   It's about something observable in the world at all times.   No point in denying the fact.

Like chemistry, physics, geology, and all other sciences.   As we learn more, we refine theories.   Sometimes, as in chemistry and geology, we have to replace the theory entirely.   But that's not the case in evolutionary science.    Darwin's original definition, "descent with modification" still holds true today.   But things like genetics, molecular biology, and information theory have greatly refined and improved his theory.   As you learned earlier, the basic points of Darwinian theory are still as they were in Darwin's time.   Would you like me to show you that, again?

    You've confused the natural phenomenon (change in allele frequency) with evolutionary theory, which explains how it works.    Geology is like that too.   Plate tectonics is the theory that explains moving continents, which is the physical phenomenon.

Plate tectonics and evolutionary theory are theories because they are supported by a great deal of evidence.   Remember what a theory is?   "An idea or group of ideas that has been repeatedly verified by evidence."

Quote from: Amo on Sun May 02, 2021 - 10:54:43
To the contrary, there are very good reasons to deny your delusions and word play.

You can deny it as you wish.   But it's still physically there, in the world for everyone to see.   That's the frustrating thing about reality; it doesn't care if you approve or not.   All you can do is close your eyes, and deny everything.

QuoteAs I have, do, and will continue to do.

Yes.