Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Ignorant Creationists vs. Knowledgeable Evolutionists
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 196 (157753)
11-09-2004 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by jar
11-07-2004 2:32 PM


Re: Where is the conflict?
I would describe myself as a Creationist. I believe that GOD created the Universe and all that we can experience. I believe that the thing that changed the state of the primordial egg was GOD, that GOD was what lead to the Big Bang.
So by the same token, do you believe in God-selection (GS) rather than secularist natural selection (NS) and God-mutation rather than secularist random mutation?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by jar, posted 11-07-2004 2:32 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 7:47 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 55 by nator, posted 11-10-2004 9:17 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 196 (157758)
11-09-2004 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by kc8rdb
11-09-2004 11:13 AM


Re: Where is the conflict?
I agree with you here. I was raised in the "classic Creationist" tradition, and taught the arguments for Creation to the exclusivity of evolution. However, as I study more and more, I am finding out that this may not be the right approach. See why I am so confused? Most of what I have been taught about the origin of the earth is not what I am learning now. Make sense?
Hi KC. Welcome! I suggest that you learn all you can from this place, but do try to comprehend all you can as to how wonderfully complex living things are and the extremely low the odds of it all coming about without an intelligent designer and creator to make it happen so precisely and so complete. Consider also that planet earth, among all the planets in our solar system just happens to be the exact distance from the sun and moon and just happens to have all the elements and the water, etc to make it the exclusive right place for life so far as we are able to observe from earth. Could all this have come to be randomly and naturally? I don't think so.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by kc8rdb, posted 11-09-2004 11:13 AM kc8rdb has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by mike the wiz, posted 11-09-2004 8:06 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 56 by nator, posted 11-10-2004 9:20 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 196 (157760)
11-09-2004 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by jar
11-09-2004 7:47 PM


Re: Where is the conflict?
No, not at all.
So you think God effected the premordial egg/soup and walked away, leaving it to do and become whatever it might do randomly and natural selectively all by itself?

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 7:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 8:22 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 196 (157763)
11-09-2004 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by mike the wiz
11-09-2004 8:06 PM


:Mmmm, not really.
The only thing I would mention, is that - is it not possible for God to use nature and randomness?
I don't see how the Genesis record can possibly be construed as to being interpreted randomly and natural selectively. Take Eve, for example. According to the record Adam slept while God operated and created his lovely wife to look quite like him when he woke up. Randomness would've had him taking a megamillion year nap.
Think about it. Me and you know that we've had our prayers answered - and it's remarkable - but most of them seem to come about by some natural way. If we required food for example - it would - apparently - by cance *supposedly* - land on our doorstep - so to speak. But guys like you and me know that everything has a purpose - even chance. Hope you know what I mean.
I've come to find that God delights in answering many of my prayers for specifics in such a manner that I KNOW he did it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by mike the wiz, posted 11-09-2004 8:06 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by mike the wiz, posted 11-09-2004 8:36 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 196 (157766)
11-09-2004 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by jar
11-09-2004 8:22 PM


Who's Diddling The System?
Well, all the evidence says that what we see, whether it's planets, solar systems, galaxies, or life itself simply evolved.
As if any of us were there to know exactly. Someone on this thread was just saying that creos think they know it all You people seem to be the ones who think thataway.
That does not mean that GOD simply walked away.
So did he do anything thereafter to keep it going as he wanted it? You seem to imply that he did indeed walk away, leaving it to itself totally.
Random Mutations and Natural Selection work every time.
.......and precious little in the fossil record for verifying the billions of should be transitionals. Again, you people are acting as though you know it all.
This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-09-2004 08:38 PM

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 8:22 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 8:45 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 59 by nator, posted 11-10-2004 9:26 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 196 (157771)
11-09-2004 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by mike the wiz
11-09-2004 8:36 PM


Re: :Mmmm, not really.
But you don't HAVE TO take it literally Buz. Tis a very old book.
I take it all literally EXCEPT when the context indicates otherwise. Otherwise it becomes a smorgasboard of stuff for each to pick and choose to suit each's personal whims.
But most of them are natural right? God is so clever that he can use the natural to intervene in our lives.
Not in the random natural selective vein, no, definitly not.
You can be sure God answers your prayers even if we evolved you know Buz. As for Genesis - didn't God "let the earth bring forth".
According to the fundamentals of the Genesis record and according to other scriptural texts, God created the species, including humans and we procreated from the originals.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by mike the wiz, posted 11-09-2004 8:36 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by mike the wiz, posted 11-09-2004 9:07 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 42 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 9:11 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 44 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2004 9:12 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 196 (157776)
11-09-2004 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by jar
11-09-2004 8:45 PM


Did God Walk Away?
And that has what to do with the thread?
If it bothers you so much, why didn't you ask the one who used it on us creationists what it has to do with the thread?
If it ain't broke...
Oh, so it just happened to have come out randomly and natural selectively just how God would've wanted it to-- earth popping up exactly where it HAD to be, relative to where the sun and moon popped up in the same random manner?
And if I could show you that there are actually tens of tens of millions of fossils,.......
Nobody's denying that.
that the fossil record is actually very extensive,
.....nor that.
there are actually many, many transitionals would you change your mind or simply walk away?
Billions, or even a few million from many species?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 8:45 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 9:29 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 196 (157778)
11-09-2004 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by jar
11-09-2004 9:11 PM


Not atol.
First, Genesis is not really a record but simply a collection of stories, many authors, many editors, written and redacted over many millenia. It's an anthology of anthologies.
Jesus, the prophets and the desciples would all disagree with you, as do many scientists and other people in academia.
But Buz, GOD left us a direct record, the Universe, to learn from. It tells a far different story than Genesis.
Observation of what we can see of the universe leaves many questions and varied debatable hypotheses and theories at best, for answers.
Why don't you believe the record that GOD left for us?
Why do you think the supreme creator who you think started it should not be involved in it's design and makeup? You God looks veeery impotently small, indeed.
With that, I'll take a breather and hope that we may hear more from the thread op poster/author and others.
This message has been edited by buzsaw, 11-09-2004 09:26 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 11-09-2004 9:11 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by nator, posted 11-10-2004 9:36 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 196 (157786)
11-09-2004 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by NosyNed
11-09-2004 9:12 PM


No, Ned. Just letting Him Act Like God's Are Suppose To Act, OMNIPOTENT!!
Hi Ned. I was going to take a breather, but see your post so I'll address it and then take a break.
You think you can put limits on God? Doesn't it occur to you that this method makes it more interesting for God (if it really is "random" so he doesn't know the details of what will happen) or it is just how his actions appear to us (if he does know ).
Amos 3:7
Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he reveals his secret to his servants the prophets.
The prophecies seem to imply otherwise, Ned. God even knows the numbers of hairs on each head and when every sparrow falls. He's totally in charge of all the details, according to scripture. I don't expect you to believe that, but people who claim Biblical religion, imo, should at least go by those scriptures which originate their religion. Else they should have little reason to believe in any of it.
After all that everyone has said about God and his power you come along and decide what he can and can't do or will or won't do?
No, of course not. I decide nothing. I simply read his book verified by scores of fulfilled prophecy and let Jehovah God be the I AM, the existing one who has revealed himself to us so wonderfully.

The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2004 9:12 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 196 (157807)
11-10-2004 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by mike the wiz
11-09-2004 9:07 PM


Keep What Is Written.
Well - I mean, doesn't everyone have a different interpretation anyway?
The more you interpret, the more you obfuscate what is written. I take it to mean what it says as most other non fiction books do without the need for interpretation.
SOme things are obvious - like Jesus's peaceful teachings etc.. But what about fire-breathing dragons and talking snakes? Shall I believe in them, or did the authors get over-excited?
The Bible has no word for reptile or snake so I believe the serpents were a reptilian species, possibly the dinosaurs as I have described in another thread. Whatever they were, they were cursed to crawl on their bellies according to the record. The record clearly implies that they were more intelligent than all the other animals. Whether or not this includes some kind of natural communication with humans, or whether the serpent was enabled supernatually by Satan to speak, nobody knows. If you believe Adam and Eve existed, I see no reason not to believe in the deception and fall as the record states. Jesus and the apostles alude to it as it was literal, effecting the sinful nature, the fall of man and the need for redemption, so it is paramount to correlate NT doctrine and it's message.
Evolutionists, including creo-lutionists MUST severely undermine the Biblical record in order to argue for a random mutation and natural selection explanation for the complex world and things in it with God simply standing by, observing as a spectator.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by mike the wiz, posted 11-09-2004 9:07 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by contracycle, posted 11-10-2004 6:04 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 51 by mike the wiz, posted 11-10-2004 9:05 AM Buzsaw has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 196 (157808)
11-10-2004 12:37 AM


Hello There..........
Where's Kc8rdb gone?

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 196 (158235)
11-10-2004 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by contracycle
11-10-2004 6:04 AM


Re: Keep What Is Written.
I got home late after a busy day so I'll pick off a couple of posts and get some sleep. Out of town most of tomorrow.
Actually, we just have to let the material world undermine the biblical "record".
What is observed in the material world must be interpreted by someone to do so. One interprets it one way and others another.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by contracycle, posted 11-10-2004 6:04 AM contracycle has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 75 of 196 (158242)
11-11-2004 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by mike the wiz
11-10-2004 9:05 AM


Re: Keep What Is Written.
Actually - modern man is still guilty of Eden - all the difference is - that Erectus was on his way out of Africa with a small brain - and when hominin evolved into modern man - then we would have had to answer to God, as he would have had the brain capabilities, and the breathe of life (Spirit) put in him.
But Adam was created in God's image outa the ground, not procreated from half baked ancestors, according to the Biblical record. Imo, it would be rather odd of God to evolve stuff. If he has the power to make it evolve he has the power to create intact. It would be senseless of him to take millions of years to do what he's capabable of doing on the spot just like he wants it to be and the way Genesis said he did it.
Either Baugh or Ham have told you that the literal Genesis is crucial to the NT. What they haven't figured out is that evolution is literally irrelevant to the meaning if Genesis.
LOL, Mike. Ham and Baugh were likely being born about the time I became a Christian and began reading and studying the Bible at age 10.
Example; Human civilisations have existed for thousands of years - with no observable morphological differences of any major aspect. It just turns out that God is so clever - that he can evolve us - and even fit our entire existence as spiritual beings - into this evolution, without us even knowing about it.
So evolution becomes irrelevant to Genesis Buz - as all our evolving was done before Adam - and the OT and NT - are still intact, and still used for showing the inspired words of God.
But the Bible, both old and new, say he was the first man.
I can certainly stick by the texts and evolution - it's surprisingly easy Buz, there's not much "fitting" needed even.
Dreaming up what's not in there is easy, indeed, Mike, but it's secular humanistic deception to undermine the Biblical record.
So am I now excommunicated from the brethren Buz?
God is the judge, not me. Messing with and adding to what God has inspired to be written is dangerous, imo, as it's part of the slippery path to eventual total rejection and apostasy as several on this board have declared. Haveing said that, it is my understanding that it is the atoning blood of the "Lamb," Jesus that saves. I John 5:ll says it is he who has Jesus, the saviour who has life. I count you as a brother in Christ based on your testimony. Imo, it's what you believe and do about God and Jesus that really counts, not what you believe about origins, but God is fussy about how we treat his Holy Scriptures. See the last few verses of the last chapter of Revelation. Jesus did say, concerning the judgement that he "never knew" many who cried, "Lord, Lord." They likely called him "Lord," but lived for and like the devil. Each must examing each's heart and soul and seek to keep on keeping on being commited to Jesus as both saviour and lord as Christians.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by mike the wiz, posted 11-10-2004 9:05 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by mike the wiz, posted 11-11-2004 10:17 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 93 by mike the wiz, posted 11-11-2004 1:28 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 196 (158244)
11-11-2004 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by nator
11-10-2004 9:17 AM


Re: Where is the conflict?
How do you tell the difference between them?
Jar, to whom I asked the question seemed to understand the difference. What's your problem? Read and think.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by nator, posted 11-10-2004 9:17 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by nator, posted 11-11-2004 3:22 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 196 (158247)
11-11-2004 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by nator
11-10-2004 9:20 AM


Re: Where is the conflict?
What are the odds, Buz? Please show your math.
The odds are great, imo, and I'm not doing the math.
What do you mean by "precisely" and "complete"?
Look the words up. That's specifically what I mean.
Please show your work.
Please move on. I stated an opinion and have no time nor desire to be drawn into a side trip science debate with you on every little thing I say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by nator, posted 11-10-2004 9:20 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by coffee_addict, posted 11-11-2004 12:49 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 80 by NosyNed, posted 11-11-2004 2:24 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 81 by Parasomnium, posted 11-11-2004 4:07 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 87 by PaulK, posted 11-11-2004 5:26 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 100 by nator, posted 11-11-2004 3:32 PM Buzsaw has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024