School system acting not so smart.

[Slater]

Genesis 1:
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.
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.
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.

(oop, srry for doublepost)

[agasfas]

OKay this thread is going a bit off topic. To clear some stuff up:

First off, like many have stated there is a difference between Maco-evolution and Micro-evoluation.

Just let me say there are different definitions of Evolution which people look past.

First, Micro-Evolution: change we go through during life and passing our mixed genes down--offspring. That's fact.
Ex: baby growing up into an adult, lava to butterfly etc...

Though if you're not careful, micro-evolution can be skewed to mean the total opposite.

Second definition of Evolution that is taught, where we evolved from another organisism is false and isn't backed by any facts. (Macro)


Evolution can be defined so many ways... It really depends on what kind you're talking about. Be careful wich "kind" of evolution you talk about.
My advice, stop arguing... no good can come from it. We know what we believe and that's fine. No point in arguing the same point.

[SonicRose]

Where do I begin?

Let me start with this... Evolution was not simply "Accepted" It required people, like Ernest Haeckle, who forged Embryo drawings making them relatively indestinguishable from real embryos. His pictures are still in use today in science text books and he was arrested 150 years ago. He was also convicted of fraud before. Darwin, the father of Evolution, was Captain's Companion officially on the Beagle, the trip to the Galapagos Islands that made him famous. He was suppsedly Christian at the time and got shamed out of his convictions by the hyppocrites on the ship. He was given a copy of Charles Lyell's book on Geology which was a radical departure from traditional Geology of the day. Lyell taught Darwin (in his own words) a new way of thinking...

Darwin wrote: "The greatest merit of the 'Principles' was that it altered the whole tone of one's mind, and therefore that, when seeing a thing never seen by Lyell, one yet saw it through his eyes."

"...I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me."

Darwin: "I love fools’ experiments. I am always making them." (from autobiography)

Mano (Mark) Singham admitted: "We only introduce arguments and evidence that supports the currently accepted theories and omit or gloss over any evidence to the contrary. . .We appeal-without demonstration-to evidence that supports our position . . . And I use that trust to effectively brainwash them. . . . our teaching methods are primarily those of propaganda."

Michael Ruse (a promonent Evolutionist today, if not THE authority): "Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion-a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality ... an explicit substitute for Christianity... Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."

If this doesn't show BIAS I don't know what does.

Also...

Richard Dawkins (evolutionary biologist):
"Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist."

"Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose...Natural selection is the blind watchmaker, blind because it does not see ahead, does not plan consequences, has no purpose in view. Yet the living results of natural selection overwhelmingly impress us with the appearance of design as if by a master watchmaker, impress us with the illusion of design and planning."

"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)."

I am not saying that all Scientists or people who believe in Evolution are Atheists, but their LEADERS are the High Preists of Death, believing in Death before Adam, and Adamantly against Creation, those who are most involved and prommonent in Evolutionary fields, 99% of them are atheists. People hostile to the Gospel.

We have a situation where the rules of science were change for only Evolution, which has been fought since its conception, and only a MATERIALISTIC interpretation of the data.

In otherwords, only NATURAL causes must explain EVERYTHING in life. Which Completely Eliminates God or Divine possibility. Thus we are an accident, a product of random chance and mutation, and by chance we are here, we owe noone but ourselves for being here, and eliminate God's Glory (If followed through to the fullest).

[Slater]

as is my advise (about stopping the debate). That was not why I created this thread, but as you can see my original point was proven when it comes to church being attacked by evolution.

Back to the original point, please pray that people will get their heads on straight again!

[Technomancer]

perhaps, but still, one species never changes into another. That view is completely baseless (no proof), and it goes against God's Word.

Also false, speciation as I have described above occurs and has been observed both in the wild and in the laboratory. Again, refer to the TO site for referances relating to this. Likewise, the relatively new discipline of phylogenetics has shown the similarity of DNA between species follows the hierarchy determined by evolutionists using only morphology as a guide. IOW humans are more similar to chimps than either are to horses, and all three are more similar to each other than crocodiles. Time is the key issue here: a lizard won't become a bird overnight, there are many, many incremental steps and no giant leaps. The fossil record is also quite strong in showing the existance of such transitional forms.

As far as the word of God goes, there are many, many Christians who accept evolution on the basis of the physical evidence. Some of them were pioneers in its development as a theory. Have you ever read any of the Christian discussions of evolutionary science that have been written by its proponents?

[Slater]

therefore the verses I just posted are not truth?

sorry, while I would like to continue this debate, it's not going to happen here. I strongly urge everyone to get back on topic; I don't want this to get closed.

[Kat Walker]

Therefore, creationists MUST believe in microevolution, because it is the ONLY way multiple races could have stemmed from Noah's family. Microevolution is in fact proved TRUE by this example, because we are all still human, it's just we are variants from the original through microevolutionary processes.

I find genetics very interesting. If my assumptions are correct, the more humans cross interracially, the more genes get bumped up from recessive to dominant. Race mixing actually fosters diversity by increasing the amount of traits people can inherit. So theoretically, if one human couple were actually to reach the exact middle of the color spectrum (so to speak) their children could be of ANY color. Most creationists choose to think these were the genes carried by Adam and Eve as the parents of the human race. For an evolutionist the theory might also involve some microevolution/adaptation from groups being isolated in certain areas of the world (dark skinned people in hot regions, light skinned people in cooler regions with less sunlight, etc.) Either way, it's a very creative God to come up with that system.

[SonicRose]

On another note, it's not a matter of "Could God have Created through evolution?" it's Did he? No. The Bible indicates no such thing. God Authored the Bible. He is the AUthor of Life and of Everything. Don't we all believe He is Supreme, Not us? We are accountable to Him people, he doesn't want us to be ignorant of Him and His Ways.

Evolution completely Trashes Genesis, the most looked to and refered to Book in the Bible. It lays out everything, Creation, the Fall of Man (How Sin and Death came into the World), Marriage, etc. Jesus refered to it "Have ye not read that the two shall be as one?" (Marriage peeps!)

The equasion is simple.

Perfect Creation ---> Man -----> Sin -----> Death

Evolution makes Death before Adam.

Death-----> Adam ----> More Death

Does not compute. Seems to me if God created the world on death and destruction then it wouldn't be "Very Good". And it seems to me. And since Biblical Chronology puts the earth at about 6,000 years old, and Evolution says Billions of years, you have...

Billions of years of Darkness killing everything on earth in bitter cold (See Pluto), or Billions of years of Sunlight Baking it to a crisp (See pictures of Mars).

Supposing then that the earth was rotating properly, Billions of years of death ammounts to, whatever way you want to look at it - genetic mistakes and rejects, slowly evolving and dying... and I dunno about you but I can't live with a half completed mouth or half completed arms. You see in premature babies what half-formed anything has a chance of surviving on its own.

[Hitokiri]

As far as the word of God goes, there are many, many Christians who accept evolution on the basis of the physical evidence. Some of them were pioneers in its development as a theory. Have you ever read any of the Christian discussions of evolutionary science that have been written by its proponents?

However...placing your belief in evolutionism before God is bilically and all together wrong.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Genesis 1:
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.
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.
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.

it is true, but it does not say that those animals changed in little ways. The cattle back then could of been smaller, and maybe like, shorter legs.

One example are giraffes. Lets say God made Giraffes with short necks and legs and long necks and legs. Those with short legs and necks could not reach high trees for food as the long necked/legged ones could. The shorter ones eventually die. This is just an example (not exactally a proven example, but it does say something)

SO what Genesis says is true. Cattle back then and cattle now are both cattle! But they may had some differences in between them. But they are still cattle!

[Technomancer]

therefore the verses I just posted are not truth?

Well, I suppose I could be facetious and ask 'what is truth?'. But seriously though it's a question we need to consider. The truth is not only illuminated by a literal, fact for fact narrative. It is also illustrated through story and myth. Jesus's parables are one such device, the genesis myth is another. Myth, it must be remembered does not mean 'lie', rather it is an exposition of our deepest truths through story. The ancient Hebrews were not a scientifically sophisticated poeple, even by the standards of their own time. A scientific/historical exposition would have meant little to them when put against the stories that had real meaning in their lives- stories about real things told in an unreal way. So, instead of history, we take out the theological meaning of story- God is one, he made the world, man was made in God's image, man sinned, etc

[Slater]

how can you say that Genesis is myth when Jesus often referred to it, as wall as Paul and John?

[agasfas]

Another example:

The many different breeds of dogs. Wolfs, german shepards etc...
Cats: Bobcat, lion, tiger, many breeds of house cats.

Although they are all different, they are still cats. Like humans things are varied. Some people are tall, some short, some skinny, some fat, brown hair, blonde hair, red hair etc. That's all passing on genes and changing, but not into another organism. The cat is still a cat, a dog is still a dog, the human is still a human.

[ShiroiHikari]

oooookay. guys, can we stop debating please? to tell you the truth, I should lock this, but I won't for now.

[Kat Walker]

We could assume, also, that in a sinful fallen world that's constantly changing and dying, evolutionary concepts like natural selection and adaptation are the only feasible methods of survival for some species. I've never really heard of anyone who would try to implement these facts in a way that would work with the Bible, even though there's plenty of room to theorize.

The many different breeds of dogs. Wolfs, german shepards etc... Cats: Lions, tigers...

I'm curious, what exactly happens when animals of the same genus (correct me if my terminology is wrong >_>) but not the same exact species -- such as a lion and a tiger -- interbreed? I've heard that mating a horse with a donkey will produce a mule, but that mule will be born sterile and cannot reproduce. Will a liger/tigon be able to breed? How does that pertain to microevolution? Where exactly does evolution draw the line in what species can cross?

[Slater]

oooookay. guys, can we stop debating please? to tell you the truth, I should lock this, but I won't for now.

Thank you! *points everyone to the first post* Just pray people... that's all I ask.

[Nate]

Edited due to Shiori's wishes. ^^;;

[Technomancer]

We could assume, also, that in a sinful fallen world that's constantly changing and dying, evolutionary concepts like natural selection and adaptation are the only feasible methods of survival for some species. I've never really heard of anyone who would try to implement these facts in a way that would work with the Bible, even though there's plenty of room to theorize.

This is not to debate, but rather to state some of my own personal beliefs on the subject. I would separate natural evil from moral evil and attribute that latter to the Fall, but not the former. This, I think, is ultimately concordant with both the physical evidence and with scripture; humans having been around only a short time, whilst predation, volcanoes, etc long predate us.

[agasfas]

whilst predation, volcanoes, etc long predate us.

Just a bit randon, science as actually found carbon dating to be inaccurate and false. Also, science proves the Grand canyon could have founded from a massive flood. WHen things like that happen, it caused the errosion to seem older.

Random example: Each year about .0001% more salt is added to the sea/oceans. By calcuation, there isn't enough salt concentrate in the ocens to account for millions of years... only about 20,000 at max. Scientific study.

-amount of helium in the air doesn't account for more then 15,000yrs.
the list goes on and on.

It really depends on where you get your information. There are always different sources which cause arguments. I think we should just forget all the secondary details, sources, opinions and beliefs--let it drop. I say we get back on the original topic at hand and pray.

anyways:
I agree. I will pray.

[Fsiphskilm]

SonicRose & agasfas speak of things that are very interesting and should be payed attention to.

I shall say one thing... In this day in age a lot of us christians are compromising little by little the things which we know deep down inside are wrong. But to make ourselves feel better and to clear up any question in our minds we begin putting God aside and listening to the foolish wisedom and intellect of man.

Sadness.

[Slater]

true, true... it is very bad... which is why SonicRose and I wanna get together and go work for the Creation Museum! ^_^

[Technomancer]

I suppose that telling oneself that scientists hold the positions they do because they are atheistic or humanists or ha ha "compromisers", may hold some comfort fo some. It certainly seems to eliminate any need to deal with the actual reasons for why the theory is accepted. Science is hard, name calling is easy. More importantly though it is arrogant and presumptuous to make any such claims regarding the faith of scientists. You do not know their souls, nor their beliefs; very few people here even know any scientists on a personal level.

To understand why the theory is accepted, it is necessary to understand the science behind it as it is understood by its adherants. Repeating tired and misleasing urban legends gleaned from the internet impressess no one who as actually studied science to any serious degree. Understanding takes effort and hard work, and a willingness to read material that one may even disagree with. One cannot substitue five minutes and google, or even the so-called critiques written by various creationists (who themselves usually betray an abysmal understanding of the theory). To understand science you must read science.

[Fireproof]

EDIT: Personal opininions are bad.

[Slater]

please guys... stop those kinds of posts in this thread... make another thread or something, but not in here. I'm a prophet, and it's V. hard for me to see the premise of an argument and not be able to debate it...

[Nate]

I would like to point out some things that are true for a second.

1. NO ONE knows how, or when God created the universe. You can make educated guesses based on the Bible, but that's all they are...GUESSES.

4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. 5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? 6 On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone-- 7 while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?" - Job 38:4-7

God knows, we don't, and any attempt to say how or when He created the universe is to say that you know as much as God...which is IMPOSSIBLE because we are mortal.

2. We are called to live a Christlike life and give praise to God. How does when or how the universe was created have ANY bearing whatsoever on our obligation to live a life without sin? It DOESN'T. It is a red herring, an attempt by Satan to create disharmony and disunity within the church. History is in the past, the Bible doesn't talk about it, except to say that God created it and that's it.

So can we PLEASE stop bringing this subject up? You have your opinion, I have mine. None of us can prove our position true or false without a time machine.

God created the universe. That's all we need to know. Anything beyond that is personal preference and cannot be proven.

[ShiroiHikari]

emphasis quote.

I would like to point out some things that are true for a second.

1. NO ONE knows how, or when God created the universe. You can make educated guesses based on the Bible, but that's all they are...GUESSES.

4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. 5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? 6 On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone-- 7 while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?" - Job 38:4-7

God knows, we don't, and any attempt to say how or when He created the universe is to say that you know as much as God...which is IMPOSSIBLE because we are mortal.

2. We are called to live a Christlike life and give praise to God. How does when or how the universe was created have ANY bearing whatsoever on our obligation to live a life without sin? It DOESN'T. It is a red herring, an attempt by Satan to create disharmony and disunity within the church. History is in the past, the Bible doesn't talk about it, except to say that God created it and that's it.

So can we PLEASE stop bringing this subject up? You have your opinion, I have mine. None of us can prove our position true or false without a time machine.

God created the universe. That's all we need to know. Anything beyond that is personal preference and cannot be proven.

with that, this thread is locked, since we all have our own personal opinions which aren't likely to be changed by debating on a thread on the internet. feel free to discuss via PM or other method.