Christian Forums

Quote from: Amo on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 07:08:52
By our words we shall either be justified, or condemned.

And that is no doubt the basis for all that you espouse; and how sad it is.

Quote from: Amo on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 07:08:52
I am not the one introducing foreign and extra biblical idea's. The theory of evolution simply exists nowhere in scripture at all.

I have never said that it did. And I don't believe that it does. The irony here is that it is only your own [really bad] interpretation of what you read of what I have written that you would think that.

Quote from: Amo on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 07:08:52Perhaps you can teach me something, about the benefits Godward, of the theory of evolution. How does this truth as you see it, enhance and better enable the gospel of Jesus Christ to go forward?

Perhaps, just perhaps, it is actually how God brought His creation into being as we see it today..  If so, then it is truth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr6NBtLNpu0

A good video addressing problems with the asteroid impact extinction theory, concerning which many scientists are now changing their perspectives. 

Quote from: 4WD on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 07:23:31
And that is no doubt the basis for all that you espouse; and how sad it is.

It is not my basis for anything. I did not come up with the idea. It is biblical doctrine straight out of the mouth of Jesus Christ. It is not sad at all, it is divinely established fact concerning everyone of us, straight from the mouth of your personal Savior and mine. He is not sad, nor are any of His teachings. He and they are what every person will be judged by. Amen.

Quote from: 4WD on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 10:54:16
I have never said that it did. And I don't believe that it does. The irony here is that it is only your own [really bad] interpretation of what you read of what I have written that you would think that.

Now we have a real problem. If you agree that scripture does not teach or even hint at the theory of evolution, and you believe evolution is true, then what do you claim the scriptures teach about our creation or origins? Is the creation account false? If not what does it mean? Do you believe we are left in the dark about our origins? If so why? What purpose does the creation account in scripture serve?

I accept your above declaration that the theory of evolution is entirely extra biblical. I even do apologize if in fact, this is what you have always believed and expressed which I have missed. On the other hand, why such a fuss about one word, yom, if not in relation to the deep time scenario required for the theory of evolution you espouse. You do of course choose the definition best suited to support that theory, do you not? Knowing of course that there is a very different view which lines directly up with that which scripture plainly states.

https://www.discovercreation.org/blog/2020/01/24/what-does-the-word-day-yom-mean-in-genesis/

Quoted article below from link above.

QuoteWHAT DOES THE WORD "DAY" (YÔM) MEAN IN GENESIS??

There are many biblical occurrences of yôm: it appears a total of 2291 times with 1446 being in the singular (a slight majority, 729, appear with a preposition), and 845 in the plural (only 213 appear in a prepositional phrase).18...

...The word yôm, either singular or plural, is used with a number 359 times outside of Genesis 1...Terence Fretheim observes, 'When the word "day" is used with a specific number, it always has reference to a normal day.'21...

... The two words, 'morning' and 'evening', are combined with yôm 19 times each outside of Genesis 1 (three times these words share the same reference cf. Numbers 9:15, Deuteronomy 16:4 and Daniel 8:26), and with each occurrence a twenty-four day is signified...

...It should be further observed that when 'morning' and 'evening' occur together without yôm (this happens 38 times outside of Genesis 1, 25 of the 38 occur in historical narrative), it always, without exception, designates a literal solar day...

...The word 'night' is similarly associated with yôm. These words are combined 53 times in the Old Testament outside of Genesis 1. The majority (26 times) appear in the historical sections; of the remainder, 16 are in the poetic sections and 11 in the prophetic. The meaning communicated by these combinations is also a solar day...

...'Light' appears with yôm 15 times outside of Genesis 1, and in most of the cases it refers to the cycle of time, with three observable exceptions: Isaiah 5:30, Amos 5:18, 20. The context makes it clear that the figurative language used in these verses refers to some future time when God will demonstrate His power to man. 'Darkness' is used in conjunction with yôm 11 times beyond Genesis 1, and most of these (seven of them) are figurative. These references are: Ecclesiastes 11:8, Isaiah 29:18, Joel 2:2, 31, Amos 5:18, 20, and Zephaniah 1:15. The Ecclesiastes passage uses 'darkness' as a time of trouble; the prophetic passages use eschatological language to denote some future time. It must also be noted that there are very few uses of 'light' or 'darkness' with yôm in the historical sections ('light' has three and 'darkness' has one). The majority occur in the prophetic genre where often these words have a symbolic meaning of blessing or judgment. However, when these words are used in historical narrative, they employ their referential value referring to that which is known by human experience...

...The point of discussing the semantic approach should be rather obvious. God, through the 'pen' of Moses, is being redundant for redundancy's sake. God is going out of His way to tell us that the 'days' of creation were literal solar days. He has used the word yôm, and combined this with a number and the words 'morning' and 'evening'. God has communicated the words of Genesis 1 in a specific manner, so that the interpreter could not miss His point. God could not have communicated the timing of creation more clearly than He did in Genesis 1.

The meaning of words is important for clear communication. It is by their use and contrast that we can accurately arrive at correct biblical interpretation. We can apply a semantic approach to Scripture and believe that we have understood what God wants us to know. As this approach is applied to Genesis 1, the only meaning which is possible is that the 'days' of creation were 24 hour days."

Read the full article here: https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/the-days-of-creation-a-semantic-approach/

Quote from: 4WD on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 11:02:27
Perhaps, just perhaps, it is actually how God brought His creation into being as we see it today..  If so, then it is truth.

So what would that mean concerning the present Genesis account in scripture? How could it and the theory of evolution be truth at the same time? If they are, how can anyone take anything else in the scriptures to mean anything like what they actually simply state? If the opening account of all scripture can mean something so totally different than what it plainly states, as the theory of evolution, how can anyone hope to get the interpretation or understanding of the rest of it correct? How could the New Testament ever tell us the following in any serious manner?

2Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 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.

This couldn't even have been true, until the theory of evolution was fully developed and God's own all accepted and preached it. Still, they would have to be able to explain it form scripture, which as far as I know, no one can do. Then there is the problem of course, of those scriptures which back up the six day creation account. Doesn't seem very likely.

Quote from: Amo on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 12:48:34
Read the full article here: https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/the-days-of-creation-a-semantic-approach/

You give me an article; I give you a book:

https://www.amazon.com/Matter-Days-Resolving-Creation-Controversy-ebook/dp/B00U77Z0NI/ref=sr_1_1?crid=8ZN6W1FVRUY4&keywords=A+matter+of+Days&qid=1647886975&s=books&sprefix=a+matter+of+days%2Cstripbooks%2C112&sr=1-1

Quote from: Amo on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 12:58:12
So what would that mean concerning the present Genesis account in scripture?

If you would stoop so low as to learn a little bit about what science has to tell us about the history of the universe then you would find out that, as I have often said here, that history actually agrees so closely with the Genesis account in Scripture that even you, in your disbelief of science, would have to be amazed. I have presented you with that opportunity several times in the past. But, alas, you could not be bothered to stoop so low.

Quote from: 4WD on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 13:26:16
You give me an article; I give you a book:

https://www.amazon.com/Matter-Days-Resolving-Creation-Controversy-ebook/dp/B00U77Z0NI/ref=sr_1_1?crid=8ZN6W1FVRUY4&keywords=A+matter+of+Days&qid=1647886975&s=books&sprefix=a+matter+of+days%2Cstripbooks%2C112&sr=1-1

I have been giving you and others article after article after article for many years now. This because such can be read, contemplated, and respond to within a reasonable time frame on a message board. Books are another story. I have linked books many times, for those interested in more in depth study or analysis of this or that topic. I'm already presently reading several books, to many at one time no doubt. If your referred book has good points concerning our discussions, I would be glad to hear and or address them here. I'm not likely going to read the book you recommended, any time soon in any case. Perhaps a link to an online version, would allow me to take looks when time allows, if there is one.

Quote from: 4WD on Mon Mar 21, 2022 - 13:32:16
If you would stoop so low as to learn a little bit about what science has to tell us about the history of the universe then you would find out that, as I have often said here, that history actually agrees so closely with the Genesis account in Scripture that even you, in your disbelief of science, would have to be amazed. I have presented you with that opportunity several times in the past. But, alas, you could not be bothered to stoop so low.

Same old crap 4WD. I don't disbelieve science, I just disagree with many theories proposed as scientific fact, that are not. No doubt the book you have recommended assumes the same as you do above, that those who disagree with its conclusions do not believe in science, which is of course a load of dung. Creationists beleive science is subject to God's word, a superior and the highest revelation. Evolutionists as I see it, believe Gods word is subject to "science" so deemed, a revelation of fallen humanity. Here is some info about one of the main proponents of evolution throughout its history.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/15/charles-darwin-letter-auction-religion-bible-creationism

Quoted article below, from link above.

QuoteCharles Darwin letter repudiating the Bible heads to auction

Blunt note stating that he did not believe the Bible was 'divine revelation' nor that Jesus was the son of God could fetch $90,000: 'It is the ultimate piece'

In November 1880, Charles Darwin received a request from a young barrister named FA McDermott. "If I am to have the pleasure of reading your books," McDermott wrote, "I must feel that at the end I shall not have lost my faith in the New Testament. My reason in writing to you therefore is to ask you to give me a Yes or No to the question Do you believe in the New Testament."

Darwin's reply, penned on 24 November 1880 – exactly 21 years after the publication of On the Origin of Species – was blunt:

"Dear Sir,
I am sorry to have to inform you that I do not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation & therefore not in Jesus Christ as the son of God.
Yours faithfully
Ch. Darwin"

That letter is headed to auction at Bonhams on 21 September in New York, where it is expected to fetch $70,000-$90,000.

The 19th-century naturalist and fervent letter writer had largely evaded this question since the publication of the book in 1859. The now classic text introduced his theory of natural selection, which demonstrated that species evolve through gene variation; it was a divisive proposition for Christian readers who believed that humans were made in God's image, distinct from other animals.

Darwin's letters regularly appear for sale with much lower price tags – Bonhams sold one last autumn about the reproductive act among barnacles for $25,000. The letter to McDermott, less wordy than his typical missives, is, however, unique in its theological content. "If you're a Darwin collector, it is the ultimate piece. It's at the crux of the whole debate," said Cassandra Hatton, senior specialist in the book department at Bonhams.

For decades Darwin had avoided publishing his ideas about evolution in order to shield his family, especially his religious wife, from any hint of scandal. On this letter to McDermott, he scrawled the word "private" across the top, a significant addition considering the provocative content. Even at the age of 71, he was wary of expressing his true thoughts about his faith. "Darwin never flaunted his disbelief, but he never denied it," said David Quammen, author of The Reluctant Mr Darwin and editor of the illustrated edition of On the Origin of Species. He also never put it on paper quite as candidly as he had to McDermott.

Why had the scientist finally broken his silence? A dip into the Darwin Correspondence Project hosted by Cambridge University Library, which holds the largest collection of Darwin papers, reveals that McDermott was certainly not the first to inquire about Darwin's creed. Beginning in the late 1860s, a correspondent named Joseph Plimsoll addressed several letters to Darwin, "deeply solicitous for the salvation of your immortal soul". In 1871, an anonymous "child of God" wrote: "Oh Man, Man, Man, why wrap yourself up in the dark theories of your own imagination; and spend your days in striving to prove 'God' a liar?" Similar fanmail followed.

Perhaps Darwin was exhausted by the enquiries and the entreaties, or perhaps McDermott's sincere appeal – coupled with an assurance that he would not publicise the answer – persuaded Darwin to tackle the subject directly. "I can only imagine what went through his mind when he got this response," said Hatton.

But McDermott, whatever his reaction, was true to his word. The letter remained private for more than 100 years. It was last seen at auction in 1996.

After Darwin's death in 1882, rumours of a deathbed conversion circulated. This letter, written less than two years before, defends against such claims.

"There has been fog and falsehood and wishful thought surrounding the subject of Darwin's religious belief, or lack of it, for more than a century," said Quammen. "The McDermott letter of 1880, a real historical document, reaffirms all the other genuine evidence we have about Charles Darwin's rigorous, courageous agnosticism throughout the second half of his life."

The letter remains relevant in contemporary culture as well, said Hatton, particularly while some public schools in the US are still teaching creationism. "I think it still is a very controversial topic," she said.

According to Hatton, the auction house has fielded "strong interest" in the letter. It will be sold alongside two other Darwin letters, a signed photograph of him, and other artifacts of science and technology including an Apple-1 computer and an Enigma machine.

So again I ask, what are the fruits of evolutionary scientific theory?

Quote from: Amo on Tue Mar 22, 2022 - 07:14:59
Same old crap 4WD. I don't disbelieve science,

Yeah, that was probably unfair of me to say that.  I suspect that you don't know enough science to either believe or disbelieve.  But that doesn't stop you from pronouncing judgment against good science and scientists.

Quote from: Amo on Tue Mar 22, 2022 - 07:14:59
So again I ask, what are the fruits of evolutionary scientific theory?

I don't know what you mean by evolutionary scientific theory. There can be no argument that evolution is real. Even scientific theories evolve. But I suspect that you mean something else other than that.  But again, discussions with you about science is a useless endeavor. You simply do not have or display enough understanding of science to make it worth discussing.

As to your article about Darwin. Whether or not Darwin believed in the Bible has no bearing whatsoever on any scientific subjects he may have discussed. The simple fact that you seem not to understand is that the study of science is not dependent upon one's theology. You insist upon trying to interject your theology into the study of science. Even you should understand that the Genesis account of creation is not about science. And if you do not understand that, then perhaps that explains a lot about why you are so far out of touch with God's message of the creation account.

As I have said before, the very phrases, Creation Science and Creation Scientists, are oxymorons.  The subject of creation, specifically creation ex nihilo by God, is outside of the field of science. 

Quote from: 4WD on Tue Mar 22, 2022 - 07:22:44
Yeah, that was probably unfair of me to say that.  I suspect that you don't know enough science to either believe or disbelieve.  But that doesn't stop you from pronouncing judgment against good science and scientists.

Like I said, same old crap. Disagreeing with scientists of the evolutionary faith, equals not being able to, or capable of, understand what they are saying. Which is as I already stated, a load of dung, which you repeat very often.

I have never objected to your disagreeing with me.  That is your schtick. I have objected to your assigning every scientist to hell who doesn't agree with your interpretation. It really doesn't matter to me what you believe about creation. It does matter to me about your condemning something about which you know and understand absolutely nothing.

Quote from: 4WD on Tue Mar 22, 2022 - 07:53:24
I don't know what you mean by evolutionary scientific theory. There can be no argument that evolution is real. Even scientific theories evolve. But I suspect that you mean something else other than that.  But again, discussions with you about science is a useless endeavor. You simply do not have or display enough understanding of science to make it worth discussing.

As to your article about Darwin. Whether or not Darwin believed in the Bible has no bearing whatsoever on any scientific subjects he may have discussed. The simple fact that you seem not to understand is that the study of science is not dependent upon one's theology. You insist upon trying to interject your theology into the study of science. Even you should understand that the Genesis account of creation is not about science. And if you do not understand that, then perhaps that explains a lot about why you are so far out of touch with God's message of the creation account.

As I have said before, the very phrases, Creation Science and Creation Scientists, are oxymorons.  The subject of creation, specifically creation ex nihilo by God, is outside of the field of science.

More of the same lame crap. Creation scientists do not claim to understand how creation ex nihilo happens, nor is it what they study or are endeavoring to reveal. Their science involves showing that it did happen, as opposed to evolution as the cause of our origin. Not how such could happen. You already know this though, it is a false narrative I suspect, you can tell yourself you are correct about. Nevertheless, it does not even address what we regularly discuss, or what Creationists are scientifically studying. It is something we will not know in the here and now, nevertheless God's word does proclaim -

Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good report. 3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Whether or not evolution is real, depends upon what one means by evolution. Change is real for certain. Whether that change is actual evolution or devolution is highly debatable. Which is one of the remain differences between evolutionary scientific theory, and creation scientific theory. Evolution supposes complexity, purpose, and function has moved forward to where we are today, from simple to complex. Creation supposes complexity, purpose, and function were at their highest levels at the beginning, by special creation. Both allowing for some fluctuation between. Perhaps you are the one, who does not properly understand this basic difference.

The following is something else that according to many, is also true about the theory of evolution.

https://ffrf.org/publications/freethought-today/item/28552-evolution-and-atheism-best-friends-forever-jerry-coyne

Quote below, from link above. Emphasis is mine.

QuotePublished by the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc.

Evolution and atheism: Best friends forever: Jerry Coyne

Here is an edited version of the speech given by Jerry Coyne at FFRF's 39th annual convention in Pittsburgh on Oct. 8. FFRF Co-President Dan Barker introduced him:

Jerry is a past recipient of FFRF's Emperor Has No Clothes Award and has been an honorary board member and has also worked with our attorneys over the years. He is professor emeritus in the department of ecology and evolution at the University of Chicago and a member of both the Committee on Genetics and the Committee on Evolutionary Biology. He's written 119 scientific papers, 150 popular articles, book reviews, columns, and a very popular book about the evidence for evolution: Why Evolution is True. And I think, when it comes to this book, nobody does it better. In fact, even Richard Dawkins said that he didn't need to write his next book because Jerry Coyne had already done it. His newest book is called Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible. Let's welcome Jerry Coyne.

By Jerry Coyne

Here's my thesis for the evening: The fact of evolution is not only inherently atheistic, it is inherently anti-theistic. It goes against the notion that there is a god.
Accepting evolution and science tends to promote the acceptance of atheism. Now, it doesn't always, of course. There are many religious people who accept evolution. I would say they're guilty of cognitive dissonance, or at least of some kind of watery deism.

The path from going to an evolutionary biologist to an atheist is pretty straightforward. You write a book on evolution with the indubitable facts showing that it has to be true, as true as the existence of gravity or neutrons, and then you realize that half of America is not going to buy it no matter what you say. Their minds cannot be changed; their eyes are blinkered.

And so you start studying what it is about religion that makes people resistant to evolution. You discover that religion is in some ways like science, but it's a pseudoscience. It makes scientific claims, or at least empirical claims, about the real world, but then adjudicates those claims in a completely different way from science.

So you start realizing that religion is perverting what you're trying to do with science by making statements about the world, but then supporting them with various cockamamie methods. And so you become an atheist and you might then become an anti-theist because you see that religion is promoting ways of thinking about the world that are not sound.

Natural pathway

This is a natural pathway; it's the same pathway Richard Dawkins went along — except that he pissed off religious people more than I did..........................

The rest of the article addresses how evolution and religion basically do not mix. Then goes into a bunch of left leaning misinformation and crap concerning the effects of religion upon societies and nations. Basically reversing the effects upon the same, between authentic Christianity, and false religions including the faith of evolutionary science. Nevertheless, by their fruits shall ye know them.

Quote from: 4WD on Wed Mar 23, 2022 - 09:25:49
I have never objected to your disagreeing with me.  That is your schtick. I have objected to your assigning every scientist to hell who doesn't agree with your interpretation. It really doesn't matter to me what you believe about creation. It does matter to me about your condemning something about which you know and understand absolutely nothing.

If that statement were true, you would be right. But it is false, just as the theory of evolution is as well.

Quote from: Amo on Wed Mar 23, 2022 - 09:37:44Their science involves showing that it did happen, as opposed to evolution as the cause of our origin.

What a joke.  Show me from their science that creation even happened. Show me from their science that the universe has not always been in existence.

And again, evolution, as most evolutionists will admit, is not the cause of our origin.  That to the honest evolutionist is yet an unknown.

And you are posting a quote from Coyne to prove what?  That some scientists are atheists.  Good grief.  It is impossible to find any group, including theologians. in which some are atheists. You are so far out in left field that you are on the other side of the fence.

Re: Creation Scientists

Let's be honest here - there's no such thing as a creation scientist. 

If there were, that field of study would entail trying to explain how the universe came to exist, how the earth was formed, and how man came to be.  But those who purport themselves to be 'creation scientists' want precisely the opposite.  They want those things to remain mysteries - the product of an inexplicable miracle.

To that end, all they really do is crap on the scientific theories that do exist, poke holes in them here or there, or offer anecdotal evidence for which they offer NO explanation.

Oh, and sell books.  Because the lot of them are rooks.

-Jarrod

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Wed Mar 23, 2022 - 13:58:04
Re: Creation Scientists

Let's be honest here - there's no such thing as a creation scientist. 

If there were, that field of study would entail trying to explain how the universe came to exist, how the earth was formed, and how man came to be.  But those who purport themselves to be 'creation scientists' want precisely the opposite.  They want those things to remain mysteries - the product of an inexplicable miracle.

To that end, all they really do is crap on the scientific theories that do exist, poke holes in them here or there, or offer anecdotal evidence for which they offer NO explanation.

Oh, and sell books.  Because the lot of them are rooks.

-Jarrod

The people that talk about the big bang are crooks?

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Wed Mar 23, 2022 - 14:37:35
The people that talk about the big bang are crooks?

The answeringenesis crowd.  They aren't there to discover anything.  They're there to sell books to the foolish and naive.

Same old, same old. Those who beleive God's word as it plainly states and declares, are a joke, off their rockers, foolish, naive, who want to establish ignorance, and are motivated by greed, certainly unable to be considered anything like the high and exalted heroes of the theory of evolution. On and on. Bring it, attack those who have faith in God's word above mans. Just as God and Christ Jesus would have you do. So be it.

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Wed Mar 23, 2022 - 13:58:04
Re: Creation Scientists

Let's be honest here - there's no such thing as a creation scientist. 

If there were, that field of study would entail trying to explain how the universe came to exist, how the earth was formed, and how man came to be.  But those who purport themselves to be 'creation scientists' want precisely the opposite.  They want those things to remain mysteries - the product of an inexplicable miracle.

To that end, all they really do is crap on the scientific theories that do exist, poke holes in them here or there, or offer anecdotal evidence for which they offer NO explanation.

Oh, and sell books.  Because the lot of them are rooks.

-Jarrod

Crapping on existing scientific theories isn't in and of itself bad.  It is inherent to science.

I don't buy the current theories wholesale.  I think our current knowledge of the universe is in its infancy with our current knowledge.

Quote from: Amo on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:14:51
Same old, same old. Those who beleive God's word as it plainly states and declares, are a joke, off their rockers, foolish, naive, who want to establish ignorance, and are motivated by greed, certainly unable to be considered anything like the high and exalted heroes of the theory of evolution. On and on. Bring it, attack those who have faith in God's word above mans. Just as God and Christ Jesus would have you do. So be it.

And again you make the charge that anyone who disagrees with your interpretation are attacking God's word. And the really sad part of that is that you don't even understand that is what you are doing. 

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:30:00
Crapping on existing scientific theories isn't in and of itself bad.  It is inherent to science.

I am not sure crapping on existing scientific theories is the best approach. Perhaps questioning, testing, and modifying appropriately is a better one.

Quote from: TCI don't buy the current theories wholesale.  I think our current knowledge of the universe is in its infancy with our current knowledge.

There is obviously much that we do not currently know of the universe; however, there is a lot that we do know about it. And what we do know may not be wrong even if in its infancy and incomplete.

Quote from: Wycliffes_Shillelagh on Wed Mar 23, 2022 - 13:58:04
Re: Creation Scientists

Let's be honest here - there's no such thing as a creation scientist. 

If there were, that field of study would entail trying to explain how the universe came to exist, how the earth was formed, and how man came to be.  But those who purport themselves to be 'creation scientists' want precisely the opposite.  They want those things to remain mysteries - the product of an inexplicable miracle.

To that end, all they really do is crap on the scientific theories that do exist, poke holes in them here or there, or offer anecdotal evidence for which they offer NO explanation.

Oh, and sell books.  Because the lot of them are rooks.

-Jarrod

Ah, the great sin of selling books. The saint evolutionists do no such thing of course. Get a grip man. All good science is and should be in fact placed under fire, that it might be tested as truth or not. Quit crying, as though this or that branch of science should not undergo intense scrutiny. If it be true, it will be only the better understood and or accepted for it. If it be false, as it has been so very many times over, then people can move on. Every single person has the right to question and doubt what any "scientist" claims, and rightly so. That they might continue to prove their points, or change them accordingly. Quit crying and insulting. Defend your views, poke holes in Creationists views. It should only make them dig deeper. Prove their points all the better, or move on from those obviously disproved.

On the other hand, whether you like it or not, God is beyond your understanding. You will not this side of heaven, know how He brought or brings creation about. You are a fallen sinful being in need of salvation and cut off from the rest of God's creation, because of your contagious condition. Let atheists and those who join them in the discipline called science, scream and rage all they want, God and His ways are far beyond them. Especially while they will place their own words, thoughts, and vain imaginings above His word and testimony. As His word itself has declared.

Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

By their fruits shall ye know them. Does the above not describe the present condition of our world? What has caused such do you suppose? Is it because so many believe the creation account in Genesis is a literal account beyond our understanding? Because there is a God beyond our fully understanding and comprehending? I don't think so, do you? Or is it because fallen humanity has done and is doing what the above scriptures describe. Professing themselves to be wise concerning that which God's word has not revealed, they have become fools. The above descriptions of humanity, being the consequences. So be it, as God's word has proclaimed. The pride of sinful humanity as always, has been, is presently, and will be its downfall.

Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. 21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:47:45
I am not sure crapping on existing scientific theories is the best approach. Perhaps questioning, testing, and modifying appropriately is a better one.There is obviously much that we do not currently know of the universe; however, there is a lot that we do know about it. And what we do know may not be wrong even if in its infancy and incomplete.

It also may not be right.  Some theories, like electromagnetic theory can be tested on an incredible level.  Some theories cannot tested at the same level with current technology.

Quote from: Amo on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:49:24
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. 21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

You like to think that such passages are charges against those who disagree with you, never for a minute thinking that they might actually be charges against you. So typical of nearly everything that you engage with here.

But, for what it is worth, you are not the only one here failing in that.

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:39:18
And again you make the charge that anyone who disagrees with your interpretation are attacking God's word. And the really sad part of that is that you don't even understand that is what you are doing.

And again, it is not interpretation, to take what a statement simply says, for what it simply says. I understand full well, that I do attack what I consider to be false doctrine, which includes all false testimonies in contradiction to the testimony of God's word which is, and declares itself to be truth. And rightly so. Which I certainly have just as much right to do, as those who declare such false doctrines and teachings, obviously have a right to do so as well. So here we are, disagreeing, as all should have the right to do. One of my latest points being, that the fruits of the theory of evolution, should certainly be considered as God's word has advised, just like all other teaching and professed faiths.

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:51:24
It also may not be right.  Some theories, like electromagnetic theory can be tested on an incredible level.  Some theories cannot tested at the same level with current technology.

But most can be tested to some level with current technology; thus, they are more than pure speculation as some would suggest.

Quote from: Amo on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 09:01:00
And again, it is not interpretation, to take what a statement simply says, for what it simply says.

But that is precisely what it is. That you do not understand that is at the root of your problem. Anything that you say concerning any passage of scripture beyond simply quoting the passage is interpretation.

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 08:59:24
You like to think that such passages are charges against those who disagree with you, never for a minute thinking that they might actually be charges against you. So typical of nearly everything that you engage with here.

But, for what it is worth, you are not the only one here failing in that.

The charges exist, and are proclaimed by God's word. Some one is right, and someone is wrong. Those who are right, are so, in line and submission to God's word. Regardless of what any of us think that word says exactly. That word itself will judge each of us accordingly. No escaping this. We are not both right, though we could both be wrong. Nevertheless -

Joh 12:44 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. 45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. 46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. 49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

You are doing it again. But I don't suppose you will ever stop such accusations.  It seems to be what you do. You clearly did not quote that passage as a warning to yourself.

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 09:09:06
But that is precisely what it is. That you do not understand that is at the root of your problem. Anything that you say concerning any passage of scripture beyond simply quoting the passage is interpretation.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11 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. 12 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. 13 And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20 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. 21 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. 22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24 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. 25 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. 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Gen 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.


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.

There, the above is what I beleive for just what it says. How about you?

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Mar 24, 2022 - 09:15:01
You are doing it again. But I don't suppose you will ever stop such accusations.  It seems to be what you do. You clearly did not quote that passage as a warning to yourself.

To the contrary, If I am wrong, I will most certainly be judged accordingly, by Christ's word. Just as each and everyone of us will. Of course I do not think I am the one who is wrong, nor do most think they are. Nevertheless, as scripture testifies, unfortunately most have been and are wrong. There is absolutely a standard of truth, by which all will be judged. As God's word itself points out repeatedly, that all in this world, even those professing to be His own, will be judged by that standard. Which standard is what we are presently examining and debating in relation to other views created and presented by humanity. Which exist nowhere in God's written word.