Red Lake, MN shooting a result of evolutionary thinking?

God did not lie by placing starlight in the sky that shows a dynamic, real universe going back millions and billions of years.

Let God be true!

God did not lie by placing evidence of ancient age and evolution of life in the rocks of our earth.

Let God be true!

However, it is true that men have sometimes misinterpreted His word and creation to say it requires they avoid the wisdom He warned against through Paul. Too bad those men are unwilling to forsake the true and lasting faith of God, replacing it with faith in the changing and unperfect wisdom of men.

your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

 

"When you teach kids that they came from nothing and are going nowhere (aka evolution) rather than the hope presented in the Bible, what reason do they have for not going off and killing people?"

SO if God used one process to create man than He loves us but if He deigned and chose to use a different process then you are willing to stand in judgement of God and say that this means that man is not loved by God and have no where to go? Pride cometh before the fall. And you must have a lot of pride if you choose to judge God's methods.

"Clearly, the 'superior race' philosophies engendered by Darwin's book "Origin of the species and the preservation of favored races" are a significant part of the Nazi philosophy (which is post Darwin). As a matter of fact, if one believes the Bible rather than Darwin, one would see there is no basis for racism whatsover. According to the Bible we are all Adam's race - one race - man. In contrast darwin said that many negroid peoples were less evolved. It only added a great deal of fuel to the fire. "

And here you commit the fallacy of equivocation.

Darwin used races in his book meaning species. Natural selection. Survival of the fittest. The best species for a given situation will prevail.

Darwin was also one of the most socially progressive men of his day and spoke out against descrimination.

Only today, years after his death, do you take his meaning, change it and slander him.

And before you try and tie biology to the Nazis again you had better take a close look above at the quotes from HItler's own pen. I believe he was a young earther.

"Moreover, if evolution is true, then there is no such thing as morality."

Where is the logic in this? Again, if God chose to create in one way then we take our morality from God and from His word in the Bible. But if He used a different method then we do not do this? This is totally asinine.

So do you think that it is wrong to eat meat? It will be a sin when I eat that steak I have for tonight? When a lion uses his finely tuned machinery to kill another animal for dinner that is a black mark upon the creation?

No! The are things being done as God intended them.

"Evolutionists are simply worshiping the wrong god. It all comes down to whether you believe the Bible or not. If you do believe the Bible's history is true, then you cannot accept evolution. It is as simple as that."

False dilemma. Another logical fallacy. It is possible that your interpretation of scripture is wrong.

And just where do you get that I am "worshiping" evolution? It is the normal tactic of the practiced YEer to employ slander as much as possible. When you do not have a factual answer, you are forced to try and make your oppenent look bad by trying to make false ties to abhorred things like the Nazis, to falsely accuse them of not believing God, and to falsely accuse them of worshiping biology. If they had a case, they would simply present it. The slander indicates that they know that they do not have a case.

 

"One think I have learned is that you can never win a debate with one who believes that the theory of evolution is based on facts."

It is based on facts. Facts that the YEers have no other way to explain to us. So instead they go off slandering fellow believers and making false claims.

YE is a creation of the antichrist used to divide believers, drive believers from the faith and to prevent the salvation of non-believers. It takes YE adherents and leads them into a mechanical view of the creation that completely avoids the importance of the spiritural significance. It leads to YE adherents passing on blatently false material because it comes from dishonest YE leaders. It leads to YE adherent slandering their fellow believers and casting doubt on their salvation. It leads to non-bleivers who see the dishonesty of the YE leadership and deciding that they want no part of a religion that must be propped up with misrepresentation. It leads to believers who leave the faith when after being fed this line for years, they learn the truth and no longer want to have fellowship with folks who would mislead them.

Yes Satan was very wiley when he crafted the false doctrine of YE. It looks so good and tempting on the surface. Yet it is a rot that brings great harm to the faith.

 

"God did not lie by placing starlight in the sky that shows a dynamic, real universe going back millions and billions of years."

Yes, tell us the YE explanation for why the measurements of the cosmic miicrowave background so strongly support the predicitons of inflation. Tell us the YE explanation of how starlight travelled billions of light years in only a few thousand years and record events that take hundreds of millions of years to play out.

"God did not lie by placing evidence of ancient age and evolution of life in the rocks of our earth.

Let God be true!"

Yes, give us th YE alternate explanation for all that we see. Tell us how the twin nested heirarchy and atavisms and parahomolgy and shared pseudogenes and shared retroviral inserts and vestiges and biogeography and all the other evidence that so strongly points to evolution should be interpreted differently.

 

Blah, Blah, Blah...Who needs faith, when we have the science of man, when we have the teachings of athiests, who needs to trust the miricales of God!

You can spout all your indoctrinated "knowlege", but it won't change my opinion that evolution is a teaching straight from the pits of hell, and has no place in Christian circles!

 

Yes because who needs any pesky facts when we have people who are sure they and they only can determine the mind of God! No need to doubt anyone like that.

Now, just how do we go about deciding which of all the contradictory groups and individuals who claim this devine revelation are right?

 

Right on Brother!!

Just taking God at His word, m'friend, just taking God at His word!!!

 

"You should actually try that sometime. His Word is the only absolute truth you will ever find. You should invest in believing it instead of fallible man. "

Then why should I believe you, a fallible man, in your interpretation rather than some other person's interpretation? YOu are the one who discounts the evidence from creation that could be used to support or reject your claims. That automatically puts your views in a suspect light when you have to arbitrarily discard valuable information.

"Once again, the 'evidence' does not say billions of years... only the misinterpretation of that evidence. "

Then for the zillionth time, provide those better interpretations of the evidence.

There is no better interpretation or you would have provided it by now! You very rarely will make some huge copy and paste, but they fall apart upon examiniation.

Where is your better explanation for the angular uncomformities and the meanders of the grand canyon?

Where is your alternate explanation for why the CMB fulfills detailed predictions of inflation?

Why do you think that there are no radioactive isotopes on the earth with a half-life of less than 70 million years other than those being continually produced?

How do you think the Hawaiian island chain was formed?

Why do ice cores detail hundreds of thousands of years of regular change brought about by periodic changes in the earth's orbital parameters?

How do you explain the unique combination of the twin nest heirarchy, atavisms, moecular and anatomical parahomology, molecular and anatomical vestiges, the known transitional series, shared pseudogenes, shared retroviral inserts, past biogeography, present biogeography, the correct order of the transitionals in the fossil record, ontogeny, and all the other biological evidence for evolution?

How do explain the coal deposits of the world?

How did starlight cross all of those billions of light years complete with a detailed history?

Why does the slowly spreading Atlantic seafloor show radioactive dates, magnetic field reversals, and levels of sediment deposits consistent with it spreading at that rate for tens of millions of years?

When did all of the craters on the moon and the other planets form? FOr that matter, what happened to most of the craters on earth and why are there specific worldwide layers that show iridium, tekites and shocked quartz in very narrow layers from previous large impacts?

Why are there index fossils to begin with? Of all of the known fossil and extant life, most are found together in on very narrow slices on the geologic record?

Why do all of the fossils NOT show evidence that they were formed in one big flood? When in the flood were all those dinsouars and birds in China buried in ash?

WHich fossils are human and which are non-human apes?

What YE process accounts for the multiple layers of glacial deposits, the thick dolostones, the carbon isotope excursion and the banded iron formations associated with the Snowball Earth?

When you answer these with detailed better interpretations, I'll come up with another list.

I will not hold my breath because YEers are unable to provide any facts to support their assertions and they being the only ones who can correctly interpret either scripture or the creation.

 

I'll start with something positive:

You have a good point about the word machah. Now that I know that, I agree that Isaiah 25:6 could be read a different way than it is usually translated.

On this I guess we'll just have to disagree. While we seem to agree that all humans die because all humans sin (Romans 5:12), I believe sin (with its penalty of death) is something that humans do, not something that all the earth's inhabitants -- including animals -- do. Since you seem to believe animals are capable of sinning and bringing death upon themselves, do you also believe they are capable of accepting Jesus? Did they inheret a sin nature from the serpent the same way humans inhereted one from Adam? Or, do animals just die because of Adam's sin, and if so, does this mean the animals are also descendents of Adam?

I've actually never met someone who holds to these beliefs, so I'm a bit curious as to how far you take it. To a certain extent I admire your consistency in equating animal death with human death (most young-earthers don't take it as far as you do), but I still think it's a severe distortion of what the Bible says.

A good world is also described in Psalm 104. In that case, predation and prey are called good. You can't use the excuse that Psalm 104 is just poetry, because you've now admitted that it doesn't matter whether the imagery is literal or not. On this point I definitely agree with you -- even non-literal passages still need to be read seriously and should not be dismissed!

I think that Isaiah 11 and 65 describe a time of peace and security. They graphically describe this by having even the animals at peace. This is similar to how when joy is described elsewhere, even the mountains, forests and trees sing along (Isaiah 44:23). Nature is personified to vividly describe what is going on. However, this doesn't mean that pre-Fall trees could talk any more than Isaiah 11:6 and 65:25 mean that pre-Fall animals didn't eat each other.

No, it can't. It doesn't say that ravenous lions aren't there, it says "No lion shall be there" (Isaiah 35:9). If taken literally, this is contradictory to "The wolf shall dwell with the lamb ... and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together" (Isaiah 11:6). Once it is acknowledged that both verses are using figurative language, the contradiction vanishes because both images describe the same thing: peace and security.

Also, don't be so quick to infer that it is only tame lions that can be called "good". When God is described as the Lion of Judah, I really don't think a docile, domesticated lion is what is in mind (see Hosea 5:14; Revelation 5:5). Lions in all their carnivorous glory are also a good thing God made; in fact, they are one of the creatures used to describe God himself.

 

Blaming racism on Darwin is like blaming slavery on the Bible. How many Christians used The Bible to defend their "right" to keep slaves?

 

I think it would make more sense to blame the increasing secularization of our nation on the refusal of a good part of their spiritual guides - the churches - to present a credible system of belief. In other words, by opposing evolution, many churches are turning people off from finding spiritual truths, with the result they are left without the guidance God wanted them to have.

 

Do I understand correctly that you are saying that, since the Genesis creation account was written down, that anyone who believed that the 6 days were literal 24-hour days, that Adam was formed of materials from the ground without ancestors, and the years of the line from him to Abraham were literal years of literal men... anyone who has believed these things is inspired by the antichrist to believe them?

 

Do I understand correctly that you are saying that, since the Genesis creation account was written down, that anyone who believed that the 6 days were literal 24-hour days, that Adam was formed of materials from the ground without ancestors, and the years of the line from him to Abraham were literal years of literal men... anyone who has believed these things is inspired by the antichrist to believe them? </font>[/QUOTE]YE goes further by requiring this belief as a central doctrine. As a result churches are split, and the unsaved in the scientific community are alienated. That's what UTEOTW is talking about.

 

That's evasive. I re-ask: Has anyone who ever believed that the 6 days of creation were 6 literal 24-hour days inspired by the antichrist to believe that?

 

Shall we answer a queston with a question?

Has Anyone Who Ever Believed That The Six Days Of Creation Were NOT Literally Six Days Ever Been Accused Of Being Mislead By The Spirit Of The Antichrist?

It's quite common for one side to accuse the other of being mislead.

BOTH the accusations of the YEC's and OEC's are provocative and designed to promote conflict.

Neither sides accusations encourage a disscussion of the issues that will promote understanding.

It is sad to say that organizations like 'Answers in Genesis' and 'Institute for Cretion Research' are often strong promoters of this type of discention and conflict. (And now UOUTWO here).

Example in point: Most of us easily dismissed the opening article because we realize that this type of violent behavior has been around long before Darwin.

Still for some people, the opening article connected the dots between evolutionary belief and killing. They have been added to the number of people who have been decieved by the organizations promoting YECism.

Rob

[ April 17, 2005, 07:07 AM: Message edited by: Deacon ]

 

Do I understand correctly that you are saying that, since the Genesis creation account was written down, that anyone who believed that the 6 days were literal 24-hour days, that Adam was formed of materials from the ground without ancestors, and the years of the line from him to Abraham were literal years of literal men... anyone who has believed these things is inspired by the antichrist to believe them? </font>[/QUOTE]You would need to be more familar with my full range of statements on this matter to understand what I meant.

No I do not find that to be the case for everyone or even most people who fit that description. I have said multiple times that I have absolutely no problem with those who say that their faith tells them to accept the creation as a literal six day event. I personally think they are wrong. But I also think that they are mostly harmless. THis is not a matter of salvation and such there is no reason to be agreessive with them. And they are not out promoting the YE agenda and such are not doing harm.

Now we come to the YE promoters. They I believe ARE doing harm and I think Satan IS pleased with their actions and likely encourages it.

Why are they doing harm? They are promoting a false idea and are stirring up trouble. Among other believers, they will frequently and publicly doubt the salvation of those who accept an old earth. They slander those who accept an old earth. They stir trouble.

In addition, taking a look at the materials put out by the YE leadership shows that honesty is not exactly their strongest suit. They misrepresent and they do it on purpose, though I think some of them may just be deluded. But then other believers start spreading the falsehoods. They do not know the difference. They believe in a young earth and here are these people who say they are Christians and who put out material that sounds good on the surface, so they spread it. But now they are doing harm. Unbelievers see the actions of these folks and think that if Christians must lie to support this part of their beliefs, why should the rest of the religion be any different. Christians who have been told alll their life how uncompatible the Bible is with an old earth lose their faith when they learn the truth.

YE is a harmful and destructive practice.

Now usually I and other OEers avoid these kind of attacks. We allow the YEers to do the slander and attacks. However, lately we have had a larger than normal share of folks come through with not much more to claim than evolution is of the devil and you area terrible person for accepting it. So there has been a little bit of an effort here on my part to more make a point on thier tactics than anything else by turning those claims around on them vocally. Of course they ignore it. But is also is how I really feel and why I find it worth the effort to spend time defeating YE. (By the same token, there have been a huge number of copy and paste [read spamming] "posts" lately which I abhore. But it has been tempting to make a point by doing several myself. I have not done so because I just really think theat it is not worth it. That looks like a good decision.)

 

Based on science, the literal 6 day creation must be wrong-- yes, you have made that plain. So now, since science projects an end, as well as a beginning, for this earth and this universe, do you believe the sun will turn red giant, singing the earth, then explode in a few more billion years, or do you believe all this will end abruptly and there will be final judgment and a consignment of people to eternal damnation in the lake of fire or eternal glory in the New Jerusalem?