Earthage 101

A creationist forum to discuss how old the Earth is...All about how God may have done it. No argument whether God did it. We all believe he did.

You are not connected. Please login or register

Young Earth or Old Earth? Here is where to post your thoughts!

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 2 of 9]

31 Think you scared them away Lee! on Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:16 pm


View user profile

32 Gaining Wisdom and Understanding on Thu Nov 15, 2012 2:55 am

Hi LangAmil,
Welcome to the discussion. It's great to hear from someone new on this topic. I would enjoy hearing your perspective on creation if you would like to spend the time documenting it for us: old earth/young earth, Darwinist/evolutionary creationist/ instantaneous creation of plants and animals.

Proverbs gives us lots of insight into gaining wisdom, understanding, and avoiding folly. Good science, based on testing our reality and world, has also been a important source of truth. Of course the Bible is a great source of spiritual and historical truth as well. Unfortunately, the Bible doesn't provide sufficient detail on creation to provide a clear and compelling case for any of the competing versions, by only gives a summary and somewhat historical account in Ge 1 and symbolic account of creation in Ge 2. Other prophets like Job, Peter and Jeremiah give additional piecemeal insights. These narratives by the authors throughout the Bible often mix symbolism and historical accounts together. God's words on creation are often very symbolic. The main source of truth about creation unfortunately comes from nature and its historical record.

Each reader gets their own limited perspective from the Biblical accounts and join forces with others sharing the same views. It is very difficult to make perfect sense of it all without a natural perspective. For me some of the views held by people and expressed on this blog are folly and inconsistent either with the Bible and/or nature/reality. The key, I believe, is to study both reality and the Bible and discover the common truth in both by diligent honest investigation. Some people totally ignore reality in their writings and I don't believe God finds that an acceptable position to base their beliefs and promote to others.

I hope you agree with me but if you don't I would like to hear your perspective on this.

Lee Very Happy

View user profile
It is actually hard when we talk about religion and science, and there are a lot question sin our mind about how things happened, when and does what we know really what happened or is it really the truth? This is a never lasting debate, issues and questions to us people..

View user profile
A number of years back, I read a book titled Nature's Destiny by Michael Denton which supported a theory that the characteristics of the cosmos, the environments found on earth, the properties of light as well as the elements and molecules drive (or evolve) the form and function of all species in very precise directions because of their very unique and optimal characteristics. Basically the theory is that the physical laws and initial conditions in the universe were precisely tuned at the time of creation to drive creation to a very exacting developmental path that conforms to the characteristics of matter and environmental conditions on earth that these laws and initial conditions produced. This concept was not new but the author brought the topic up to date in his book with recent findings and excellent supporting data.  There is such extensive evidence for the theory that has been discovered through scientific investigation, a second reading of the book was called for.  

This topic has great relevance to the evolution/creation debate and deserves to be addressed here.  The point of the theory is that life's evolution, whether the Darwinian or God guided variety, is directed greatly by the characteristics of the atoms, their combination into molecules, and the interactions with light, electrons, and physical forces encountered near the earth's surface where very special temperatures and pressures exist.  These  properties were set at the very beginning of the universe as fixed laws of nature and have forced simple and complex life forms to develop along a predetermined path which is compatible with these atomic/molecular properties that enhance natural selection and/or unfold to meet God's predetermined plan.  The argument is made by the many examples of unique molecules and elements that have just the right characteristics to support life and permit the earth to have life sustaining environments for billions of years.  After extensive study and experiment, scientists have found that there are no other elements or molecules that can take their place or even come close to their existing optimal qualities that support life. This is a strong argument in favor of design.  The argument is further strengthened by the number of unique molecules which interact in just the right way to allow large  plants and air breathing life forms to exist. There is no credible evidence produced thus far that these atomic properties had to be this way based on a Grand Unification principle.  On the contrary, the natural constants in combination with the physical laws have the appearance of being specially tuned by our Creator to support life.  Even the slightest variation in many of them would produce a lifeless universe.  The set of physical laws and natural constants testify and make a overwhelming case for design which guided evolution toward large multicellular life forms. There is additional evidence that these characteristics aided in the development of anthropic life forms, or at a minimum, at least a strong case that nature was designed to be capable of supporting large air breathing mammals. 

For example, water is now thought to be essential for life by most scientists due to its unique properties. Among these are its very low viscosity, unique thermal properities, and its alcahest like properties which allow most other molecules and elements to dissolve into it. Searches for life in the cosmos, now focus on planets where water is thought to exist because of these unique properties.

Carbon Dioxide is another molecule with unique properties. It diffuses and dissolves readily in the atmosphere and water, is a waste product of energy utilization, is a fuel source for photosynthesis and provides its own buffer to reduce acidity while in solution. Extensive plant life could not exist without this molecule as no other fuel source makes itself so readily available in the biosphere. No high rates of metabolism, such as in animals, could exist either. The key waste product of cellular metabolism, carbon dioxide, easily dissolves in water, is transported to our lungs, and is efficiently diffused into the air as we take in more oxygen in each breath. We produce about two pounds of this gas each day as a waste product and hardly notice its existence and elimination in each breath as we rush around town thinking of all the activities we must complete before we sleep. The fact that it is a food for plants and a waste product for animals permits carbon recycling. This permits the earth's largest food chain to be solar powered for billions of years.

After extensive study, iron seems to be the only element that can manage the oxygen transport safely and efficiently from the lungs to the cells. When incorporated into the compound heme used in hemoglobin, it can increase the amount of oxygen density in the blood about 50 times than oxygen dissolved in solution without hemaglobin. Also, iron is essential for the survival of all life on our planet's surface. Without it in our planet's interior, there would be no magnetic field to protect life from the damaging particles from outer space and the erosion of the atmosphere from the solar wind into outer space. Iron and other heavy metals are also essential for our human technologies, tools, comfort, and protection. It is essential for large active animals since it is the only element that can support high levels of oxygen transport efficiently to large multi-cellular life forms necessary for high rate metabolism.

Besides iron, several of the metals give every indication that their properties were designed to perform a very special predetermined biological role in life. Magnesium has very high light absorption characteristics uniquely suitable for photosynthesis. Molybdenum is utilized in both the proteins nitrogenase and nitrate reductase both involved in nitrogen fixation. All nitrogen used by living things is intially captured by reactions involving these two enzymes. Calcium is another metal that is unique in its ability to work with proteins for the rapid conveyance of information within the cell. Because of its low weight it rapidly moves within the cell, but also because of its great binding strength to proteins relative to other light metals such as magnesium, it can be tightly controlled in large volume. The element is necessary for muscle contraction, nerve impulses, hormone release, etc.

The molecules DNA, RNA, and their assistant proteins also are uniquely fit for their roles as the subunits for advanced life forms on this planet. Studies have shown that no other molecules come close to their efficiency in packing density of information, their ability to store, retrieve, and handle this information efficiency. For DNA, the strength and internal positioning of bonds is just right to not only permit long term storage of complex information within the cell, but precisely the right shape to match that of the attendant protein shape for the efficient retrieval of the information to conduct cellular activies. Without these molecules, no cells would be possible. No cells, no life.

The bi-lipid layer consisting, seems to also be unique in its role. Lipids are hydrophobic at one end and hydrophilic at the other. When combined into a bi-lipid layer it automatically forms into a sheet in water that forms a boundary for cellular protoplasm. Its characteristics are ideal for this function: ideal viscoscity, just right bonding strength to support multicellular life, electrical insulation with just right characteristics to support nerve impulses between cells, and just right characteristics for crawling during multicellular development.

In the early 1950s, John Von Neumann envisioned an extremely advanced machine capable of self replication. Based on what we know today about the cell it puts to shame the vision of the automaton put forth by Von Neuman. The cell contains tens of thousands of types of protein nano-machines (NM), NM making other NM, NM constantly rebuilding the factory (cell), NM duplicating the factory, NM reading blueprints from the central archive library (DNA), and NM tugging and guiding shipments of raw material around within the cell. The cell seems to be the perfect example of the automaton, as a molecular machine it has been able to support all of life's many forms and functions over the history of the earth. In fact it also had the ability to diversify through the modification of its internal information into many types of life forms including plants, trees, bacterial cells, amoeba, sponges, and human beings. Always consisting of virtually the same materials but different information in each of its forms. Through it all, the elements and molecules described above plus others that were designed from the beginning worked suitably and optimally within all of life's many versions.

Just based on the limited scope of the above, there is strong evidence of design at the heart of creation that guided all forms to be compatible with the environments, elements and molecules. All the species are molded to conform to the character of our matter and habitats produced by the natural laws and are found only here on earth on its surface and in its oceans. These special characteristics present themselves in a very limited temperature and pressure range almost non-existant anywhere else in the cosmos. This further guides the development process making it extremely unlikely that advanced complex intelligent life forms could exist anywhere else besides a mirror earth-like planet. But if one did exist the author of Nature's Destiny believed, its intelligent inhabitants would likely be land based oxygen breathing carbon based life forms with very similar metabolisms and look very similar to us. He may or may not be correct on this last assumption. The degree of divergence from this view seems rather contingent on the environmental characteristics of the planet: such as land area, particular temperature range, timing of E.L.E (extermination) events, solar stability, orbital characterists, etc.

It is a safe bet, however, that the physical laws do have a profound effect on the way that life operates and the elements and molecules that are used. We can see that all life forms utilized the same biological processes and they all take advantage of the unique and optimal characteristics of the elements, molecules and habitats available here. Even if life forms were popped into existance instantaneously by our Creator as the young earthers believe, it is a safe bet that they were designed to be compatible with the physical laws, otherwise, these kinds wouldn't function well and would quickly be unselected by the other varieties competing with them for food and space. If you are of the other persuasion, believing that life developed slowly in stages through Darwinian evolution, it is also the same safe bet that beneficial changes had to align with these special elements, molecules, and environments to survive the natural selection process. Either way, physical laws and the environment tightly control the form, fit, and function of the many life forms.

What is truly amazing is that all of the properties of the elements and molecules can be derived from just four physical constants and a few quantum mechanical rules such as the Pauli exclusion principle, electron orbits must be integer deBroglie wavelengths, and each electron must have only one of two values. The physical constants are the speed of light (c), Planck's constant, electric charge (e), and the mass ratios between the proton and electron. From these all the chemical characteristics can be determined. Although a sensitivity analysis of chemical properties for the above special molecules has never been performed to my knowledge, we can confidently predict that the fundamental constants in physics must have been extremely fine tuned to many decimal places right from the beginning to give the elements and molecules their precise values that permit life and especially large mammals including human beings capable of abstract thought. What an amazing design!

Praise God for His special insight in creating the physical laws and conditions on earth. It all came together here so that we can enjoy a drink of fresh water, a deep breath of fresh air, food on our tables, and shelter from our enemies. Please let me know if anyone finds another place in the cosmos (or another cosmos for that matter) where this is all possible!

Last edited by InfinitLee on Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:05 am; edited 4 times in total (Reason for editing : typo, misspelling, grammar, clarification, added point on physical constants)

View user profile

35 Reunion Revival Response on Sat Sep 01, 2012 2:01 am

We needed some fresh thoughtful input. Thanks Dave! We love you too! Not sure why he didn't, but since Bret didn't respond to Dave's questions, I thought I would to try and resuscitate the discussion. I hope Dave will join in again soon! I hope others will join in as well.

Q1) Does the Bible expressly say it is less than 10,000 years old?
Answer- No! With verses like 2 Peter 3:8 "But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day", there is no way to demand that the creation DAYS/EPOCHS in Genesis 1 are only 24 hours when God was creating the universe, earth and all of its plants and creatures. Quite the contrary, Peter tells us that their is no correlation between God's DAYS and human days.

Q2) Does it exclude the possibility of God-guided evolution?
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the wording in Genesis 1 describes God guided evolution and provides no evidence for popping or superpopping of all plants and animals into existence instantaneously. Other verses give strong evidence for God intervening in the natural evolutionary process and growing each individual plant or animal from its 'seed'. These Bible verses are pointed out in my previous posts too numerous to list here.

Q3) Does it exclude the possibility that Moses could have been viewing the creation event from the Earth's surface and reported what he saw (like most all the other prophets given prophecy)?
Answer- No! The words in the Bible (Ge 1:2) accurately describe the liquid water upper surface (the face of the deep, And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters) therefore giving us the reference point for what follows in the Ge 1 description of evolutionary events.

Q4) Does the Bible expressly say that God created things from nothing when it says something was created in Chapter one? (warning: requires a review of the original Hebrew words used in Gen 1)
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the words describe the earth and waters bringing forth plants and animals from their seed. This process requires time to grow each one to maturity from its seed. Studying the Hebrew further confirms this fact.

Q5)Do we as Christians save more people by telling them they have to believe the Earth is under 10,000 years old?
Answer- No! Quite the contrary, the secular world uses this point to mock Christians and convince others to not take Christianity or Creationism seriously.

Q6) And to reference Revelation 22:18, do we run the risk of adding to God's Word by forcing this interpretation.
Answer- Absolutely, Yes! This interpretation by the YEs goes against the words of prophet's and God's own statements on creation. Forcing people to accept a 24 hour God's DAY and the popping concept are clearly adding concepts that were never stated nor intended by the original authors of the Bible.

Q7) "I am not sure how old the Earth is, but if you could believe the Earth is 4.5 to 5 Billion years old, would you give your life to Jesus Christ today and trust Him as your Lord and Savior?"
Answer- How old the earth is has no bearing on whether they give their life to Jesus Christ. Trust in Christianity is affected though when some groups, like the YEs, try to force the non-believers into accepting the world is less that 10,000 years old.

Lee sunny

Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:41 pm; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Added Title, typo error)

View user profile
Thanks Dave!

I'm sure they will resurface just like a bad simplex of Herpes!
But ... being able to pop these pimples from re-posting using the same member ID
does have a certain amount pleasure and satisfaction attached to it! cheers
I guess (in a weird way)... that attracting enough attention to be Spammed ...
is kind of a compliment about our dedication to keeping this Topic relevant? sunny


View user profile

37 So Has Everyone Figured it Out? on Sat Aug 25, 2012 9:57 am


I just thought I would pop by the forum after finding a rather urgent message Bret wrote a long time ago...

So let me jump in here...

Does the Bible expressly say it is less than 10,000 years old?
Does it exclude the possibility of God-guided evolution?
Does it exclude the possibility that Moses could have been viewing the creation event from the Earth's surface and reported what he saw (like most all the other prophets given prophecy)?
Does the Bible expressly say that God created things from nothing when it says something was created in Chapter one? (warning: requires a review of the original Hebrew words used in Gen 1)

Do we as Christians save more people by telling them they have to believe the Earth is under 10,000 years old? And to reference Revelation 22:18, do we run the risk of adding to God's Word by forcing this interpretation.

As most of you know, I lean Old Earth, and believe it to be so because I have found little direct evidence that God said it was young. However, my official answer is, I don't know, but it seems to be old.

The best follow up question to someone who thinks it is old and has a problem with a young earth:

"I am not sure how old the Earth is, but if you could believe the Earth is 4.5 to 5 Billion years old, would you give your life to Jesus Christ today and trust Him as your Lord and Savior?"

I love all of you and hope everyone still enjoys the discussions fostered by this blog.

In Christ,

Dave Cristofaro

View user profile

38 Balonium (aka The God Particle) on Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:28 am

That was very funny!  I really mean that, I got a good laugh from it.  Your assessment is correct that the imaginary discovery of nothing and naming it Balonium has nothing to do with the debate on evolution.  It is a nice play on words though and was very enjoyable.   

In a way, the discovery of the God or Goddamn Particle, as some call it, is much like Balonium.  The discovery seems more like wishful thinking from the Godless atheists  and subset of particle scientists to complete their standard model theory without integrating a theory of gravity or extra dimensionality than any real solid evidence for a new Higgs particle (balonium).  

There is plenty of real scientific and Biblical evidence for God guided evolution though.  I am still waiting for the ICR or any of their many followers to provide any real natural or Biblical evidence for 1) 24 hour God DAYS, or 2) God or nature popping animals into existence instantaneously.  So far I have only received Balonium.  

Lee lol!

View user profile

39 "New Element ... Confirms Evolution is True" on Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:26 am


April 1, 2012 – Scientists have discovered a new element that confirms the theory of evolution to be true. The new element – balonium – will be added to the Periodic Table of Elements with an atomic number of zero because it has no protons, no neutrons, no electrons and no evidence that it even exists.

At a press conference this morning, scientists announced that balonium can travel faster than the speed of light. This is because balonium has no protons, neutrons or electrons, so it is, in fact, nothing. And as everyone knows, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

When asked if balonium is a radioactive element, scientists said, "Yes, balonium has a half-life of one day. Of course, no one is certain if the day is 24 hours or if it's a thousand years [or many eons of time]. We should know something by tomorrow."

In its natural state, balonium is reddish-pink in color, similar to bologna – hence, the element's name. When asked what balonium has to do with evolution, former creationist Ian Taylor said, "The discovery of balonium changes everything in the debate over evolution and biblical creation." The host of the Creation Moments radio program explained, "Since balonium is literally nothing, we now have indisputable scientific evidence that nothing confirms evolution to be true."

View user profile

I actually agree with some of what you have said about the God Particle claims made recently. Here is another article that I think you will find entertaining and somewhat in agreement with your view on the unsubstantiated hype: if-you-want-more-higgs-hype-dont-read-this-column. This article is more substantive than your view however and makes specific counterpoints regarding the hype and false claims. Since science was established by God centuries ago by creating humans and providing guidance by saying 'test everything', contrary to your hype and bluster, the end of science is not at all at hand.

There is a great lesson to be learned (slowly) by many regarding jumping to conclusions which support their fundamental beliefs without much evidence. It seems to apply here as well! Since the Bible contradicts your view of popping animals and plants into existence from several perspectives and I've pointed out the verses many times over without a serious attempt on the part of the YEs to explain or rationalize these conflicts, shouldn't the YEs admit that they might be wrong about their concept of popping and super popping. The YEs must also be heavily invested as well by many millions of dollars in their facilities and staff that claim this phony popping is the truth. They (the ICR and other organizations) seem to be ignoring reality and the verses in the Bible that refutes their case as well in the interest of saving face, money and power! How about being a good Christian and admit it when you are wrong! Ge 1 clearly describes God guided evolution and not popping or superpopping. Better luck next time in choosing the right side for a debate!

Lee study

Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Jul 22, 2012 2:01 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Added link and comment, grammar)

View user profile
What is really going on here?

The Higgs is a PIG!
CERN employs nearly 2400 full-time hacks funded by 20-Euro Countries at about a $Billion/yr … !!!
Germany, France, & the UK are responsible for 1/2 of the funding themselves!
The LHC cost over $10-Billion to build … and pretty much it's sole purpose was to disprove a NEED for God
by "Finding" & proving the existence of the Higgs Boson!
Now that they have COMPLETED a very thorough FULL spectrum search for it over the last several years
and did NOT find it … they have concocted this BS story about "almost" finding it!
WHY? … Not so much because they hate God and can't admit defeat? … but this is mainly about $MONEY$ !!!
The EU is falling apart and going bankrupt at an alarming rate … and budget cuts (austerity) HAVE to be made!
If they admit the TRUTH … then 2400 pink-slips are handed out … and the LHC gets mothballed !!!
Not to mention the FACT that Quantum Physics is then finally tossed on the trash heap of Scientific History where it belongs!
What upsets me the most is … that this LIE is being sold to the World as a "FIND" of the Higgs (Pig) Boson!
After they continue to repeat this LIE enough times over the next few years … (just like Evolution)
this will become an "Unquestionable" Scientific FACT that can NOT ever be challenged again !!!
It's OVER !!!


View user profile
APNewsBreak: Evidence of 'God particle' found

Associated Press

GENEVA (AP) -- Scientists working at the world's biggest atom smasher plan to announce Wednesday that they have gathered enough evidence to show that the long-sought "God particle" answering fundamental questions about the universe almost certainly does exist.

But after decades of work and billions of dollars spent, researchers at the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, aren't quite ready to say they've "discovered" the particle.

Instead, experts familiar with the research at CERN's vast complex on the Swiss-French border say that the massive data they have obtained will essentially show the footprint of the key particle known as the Higgs boson - all but proving it exists - but doesn't allow them to say it has actually been glimpsed.

It appears to be a fine distinction.

Senior CERN scientists say the two independent teams of physicists who plan to present their work at CERN's vast complex on the Swiss-French border on July 4 are about as close as you can get to a discovery without actually calling it one.

"I agree that any reasonable outside observer would say, `It looks like a discovery,'" British theoretical physicist John Ellis, a professor at King's College London who has worked at CERN since the 1970s, told The Associated Press. "We've discovered something which is consistent with being a Higgs."

CERN's atom smasher, the $10 billion Large Hadron Collider, has been creating high-energy collisions of protons to help them understand suspected phenomena such as dark matter, antimatter and ultimately the creation of the universe billions of years ago, which many theorize occurred as a massive explosion known as the Big Bang.

The discovery of the Higgs boson won't change people's lives, but will help explain the underpinnings of the universe. It would confirm the standard model of physics that explains why fundamental particles have mass. Those particles are the building blocks of the universe. Mass is a trait that combines with gravity to give an object weight.

The phrase "God particle," coined by Nobel Prize-winning physicist Leon Lederman, is used by laymen, not physicists, more as an explanation for how the wonders of the subatomic universe work than how it all started.

Rob Roser, who leads the search for the Higgs boson at the Fermilab in Chicago, said: "Particle physicists have a very high standard for what it takes to be a discovery," and he thinks it is a hair's breadth away.

Rosen compared the results that scientists are preparing to announce Wednesday to finding the fossilized imprint of a dinosaur: "You see the footprints and the shadow of the object, but you don't actually see it."

Though an impenetrable concept to many, the Higgs boson has until now been just that - a concept intended to explain a riddle: How were the subatomic particles, such as electrons, protons and neutrons, themselves formed? What gives them their mass?

The answer came in a theory first proposed by physicist Peter Higgs and others in the 1960s. It envisioned an energy field where particles interact with a key particle, the Higgs boson.

The idea is that other particles attract Higgs bosons and the more they attract, the bigger their mass will be. Some liken the effect to a ubiquitous Higgs snowfield that affects other particles traveling through it depending on whether they are wearing, metaphorically speaking, skis, snowshoes or just shoes.

Officially, CERN is presenting its evidence at a physics conference in Australia this week, but plans to accompany the announcement with meetings in Geneva. The two teams, ATLAS and CMS, then plan to publicly unveil more data on the Higgs boson at physics meetings in October and December. Each of the teams involves thousands of people working independently from one another, to ensure accuracy.

Scientists with access to the new CERN data say it shows with a high degree of certainty that the Higgs boson may already have been glimpsed, and that by unofficially combining the separate results from ATLAS and CMS it can be argued that a discovery is near at hand. Ellis says at least one physicist-blogger has done just that in a credible way.

CERN spokesman James Gillies said Monday, however, that he would be "very cautious" about unofficial combinations of ATLAS and CMS data. "Combining the data from two experiments is a complex task, which is why it takes time, and why no combination will be presented on Wednesday," he told AP.

But if the calculations are indeed correct, said John Guinon, a longtime physics professor at the University of California at Davis and author of the book "The Higgs Hunter's Guide," then it is fair to say that "in some sense we have reached the mountaintop."

Sean M. Carroll, a California Institute of Technology physicist flying to Geneva for the July 4th announcement, said that if both ATLAS and CMS have independently reached these high thresholds on the Higgs boson, then "only the most curmudgeonly will not believe that they have found it."


View user profile

43 Beating Dead Horses and Super-Poppers on Sat May 19, 2012 3:16 am

If I understand you correctly based on your statements below, you would have us believe that all believing Hebrews that have ever read the Pentateuch throughout history and all Orthodox Jews and Christians that followed that have ever read its many translations in many languages have all interpreted it the same. Sorry to see you are still hallucinating from the Kool-aid. Bret, what you state below is a delusion and fallicious. I asked you to 'Put Up' evidence in my last post, but putting up this BALONEY is not helpful to your cause.

[Bret]- "100% of the people that read (and believed in) the Bible as God's infallible Word
believed that when God said He created everything out of nothing in 6-Days .
He meant one work week ... as He states in His Ten Commandments!"

[Bret]-"It wasn't until a few decades ago ... that a small faction of Christian Believers (in an attempt to kowtow to popular secular science)...
started to swap the gears & loosen the springs in the pocket-watch of God's account of His creation !!!"

Shocked Laughing

Throughout the history of the Bible, the Creation account has been debated and hotly contested by more than just a few. It seems that a lot of people have had difficulty in correctly interpreting God's first words in Genesis. I provided the YEs two links in my previous posts that give you evidence of this within major respected Christian organizations. The YE cult would like us to believe your hallucination that their is 100% agreement around the world and throughout time, but it pure wishful thinking on their part and considerably misleading and erroneous.

It seems to many people that the YEs can't even read and interpret Ge 1 correctly. I do not say this cavalierly or without considerable evidence to support this claim. I have given you this evidence in my posts but the YEs have chosen to ignore this evidence and not even address any of it. Let me make it rather simple for you and them. Below is a rather simple argument against your popping claim that perhaps you could address.

In Genesis 1:1 the Hebrew term בָּרָ֣א 'bara' is used to state God's creation of the Heavens (universe) including the earth. This is the term Hebrews used for creating which includes ex nihilo creation out of nothing and it makes perfect sense as God created matter, energy, space, and time in an instant for our universe from nothing. During the initial portion of God's first 'Day' the universe unfolded according to God's will and produced the earth in a primitive state during this ex nihilo creation event.

In Genesis 1:11 the Hebrew term דֶּ֔שֶׁא 'dasha' meaning sprout or grow and in Ge 1:12 the Hebrew word וֹצֵ֨א'yatsa' meaning naturally reproduce (as in begetting) is used instead of 'bara' to describe how the earth brings plants into existence from seeds. There is no evidence in this verse for God instantaneously ex nihilo popping of plants fully formed into existence on 'Day' 3. Instead, the Hebrew wording describes a growth process from seed to mature plants. How does the YE thought process reinterpret what the Bible actually states into a popping or super-popping ex-nihilo event from dasha and yatsa? It takes time to grow plants to maturity from their seeds and more than 24 hours for any large plants like bushes and trees. God is stating in this verse He grew plants from seeds while the YE states He popped them fully formed into existence. Many of us believe that the YE is ignoring what the Bible is stating in these verses.

In Genesis 1:20 and 1:21 the Hebrew term הַמַּ֔יִם 'mayim' is used and describes waste water including semen and urine and then uses the Hebrew word שֶׁ֖רֶץ 'sherets' meaning swarm or breed abundantly for the creation of animals. These terms describe natural reproduction as the method God used to bring ocean creatures into being during God's 'Day 5'. How does the YE reinterpret these defined Hebrew words into popping mature animals instantaneously into existence? It seems the original author wants to convey something to all of us that the YEs want to leave out or twist into a new description.

In Genesis 1:24 the Hebrew term וֹצֵ֨א 'yatsa' is used again meaning bring forth (implying natural reproduction) for the earth bringing land animals into existence on God's 'Day' 6. Reproduction also takes time for the cycle to occur and the animals to grow to maturity. How does the YE reinterpret the meaning of this term 'yatsa' to mean instantaneous creation of mature animals out of nothing? 'Yatsa' is used extensively in the Bible but never to describe instantaneous popping of anything into existence. The Hebrew term 'bara' is not used in this verse. In Genesis 1:25 the Hebrew term עֲשֶׂ֥ה 'asah' meaning make, accomplish, or bring forth is used instead of 'bara' to describe his making of land animals.

The author under God's guidance could have easily used the word 'bara' to describe the creation events as He popped each kind by the millions into existence if He wanted the author to; BUT HE DIDN'T! Instead, Genesis 1 contains a nice description of a completely different set of creation events that totally refutes the YE popping and superpopping concept! The YEs seem to be misinterpreting or ignoring all these other Hebrew words that describe natural reproductive concepts to intentionally enforce an erroneous view of God's creation process: one of popping all plants and animals in four 24 hour days. Instead, the truth is, that the original author describes a natural but God guided process of evolution using natural reproduction to fill the earth with all kinds of plants and animals.

Lee study

Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue May 29, 2012 12:55 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Title Change, grammar error)

View user profile
O.K. Lee ...

Let's just keep on beating the dead horse?
For thousands of years (we do agree that the Bible is only 1000's of years old ... right?)...
100% of the people that read (and believed in) the Bible as God's infallible Word
believed that when God said He created everything out of nothing in 6-Days ... then rested on the 7th
He meant one work week ... as He states in His Ten Commandments!
There were a few prominent early Church Fathers that openly doubted that this is exactly how it happened!
You were indeed right about that! (I sure hope you didn't fall down and bump your head while reading this?)
BUT! ... (you knew this was coming?) you always (conveniently) seem to omit WHY? they doubted and WHAT? they believed instead ... !!!
They couldn't believe that it took God SO LONG! ... THEY WERE "SUPER POPPERS!"... !!!
They couldn't understand why He would have to snap His fingers more than once to create everything?
They believed that God may have glorified the account of creation and stretched things out to a week ...
during the time at which this Divine account was conveyed to Adam (and/or Moses)... so He could later use this version
of how things played out ... as a model for our work week ... as He defined it in the Book of Exodus?

It wasn't until a few decades ago ... that a small faction of Christian Believers (in an attempt to kowtow to popular secular science)...
started to swap the gears & loosen the springs in the pocket-watch of God's account of His creation !!! study

Me & my YE cabal have not changed a single thing in the Bible!
It is you that has "Evolved" into believing that the Bible should "Evolve" to accommodate Science's GREATEST GRIFT "Evolution"... !!! monkey


View user profile

45 Right Over Your Head Again! on Tue May 08, 2012 1:51 am

We believe in the same God, and the same salvation unless you believe in Satan of course who has gotten you to buy into the YE LIES. Unfortunately because you have twisted God's Word to fit your erroneous illusion of popping all animals and kinds into existence instantaneously, it has affected your ability to rationally examine reality and properly interpret God's Word. All you seem to be able to do these days in your posts is delay and then make dispersions about by character and Christian beliefs. You say you are lost and don't know where to begin'. How about making a real effort to support your position Biblically for a change. I have repeatedly implored you to do this for years now. So far you haven't even made a start at supporting a Biblical case for the YE position of God popping instantaneously into existence all of the animal and plant kinds. The burden is on you at this point to support your YE claim. I have already made a good Biblical case for my position and referenced many verses of the Bible to support my view. The YEs on the other hand can't seem to find any verses to support their case that will hold up to scrutiny. As I said months ago, I will be glad to move on to the scientific support for evolution after the YEs make a Biblical case. Unfortunately, the YEs have not satified this condition and continue to be evasive and dismissive about this lack of Biblical support while continuing to sling mud at others (me in particular) who disagree with their position. It's time to substantiate the YE views biblically or admit they're wrong about their views! As people say 'Put Up or Shut Up! If you can't do it, maybe you should find someone in your network of YEs that can make a worthy attempt. In the mean time, I plan to continue my posting on creation related topics with their Biblical support like I did in the last post. There is good Biblical justification for every point that I made in it and I am not suprised that you disagree with my views since you have so poorly interpreted the Bible and reality.


PS The words you posted below apply to the YEs more than me, think about it! The YEs are the ones ignoring and reinterpreting many of the Bible verses pertaining to creation. I have been only pointing them out to you! The YEs are the little stinkers. Since you like sayings, here is one for you that I have enjoyed.

"People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks!"
Of course your walls and foundation are so transparent and difficult to find that they don't seem to exist. At least we can't see them. It doesn't seem worthwhile therefore to throw any rocks back in response to your grains of sand hurled my way.


Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue May 08, 2012 9:50 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Added comment)

View user profile

46 *** I'm sort of at a loss here? *** on Sun May 06, 2012 12:41 pm

Lee ...

I honestly don't even know where to begin with responding to your last Post?
It would seem that you've proved my greatest fears about where things lead when you choose to change the meaning
of God's Word to fit your personal perception of reality that's heavily influenced by the popular "theories" of the day!

I shouldn't be surprised that when you believe in a different kind of creation ...
that it would lead to you believing in a different kind (or method) of salvation ...
which means you (likely) believe in a completely different kind of god?

It's like taking an old-fashioned pocket-watch apart!
If you start to swap the gears around and put it back together ...
It will still look like a watch!
You can still wind it the same way!
It will still tick ... and the hands will still move!
But ... it will never tell you the correct time again!
Now the watch is not only useless ... but dangerous!
If you continue to use this watch and follow "its" time vs. reality
you will end-up losing your job, miss every meeting with your family & friends,
and eventually be committed to an asylum as a looney-toon!

May I suggest that we steer this debate into the realm of the "Science" that supports Evolution?
This way if (or should I say when)... you're wrong about what you believe ...
it can only effect your pride ... and not your Salvation?

With God's Word ... do not tinker
or you'll perish ... a dirty stinker


View user profile

47 A Necessary Evil on Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:51 am

God states in Isiah 45:7 (KJV, ASV) that He 'creates evil' as well as things that are good. In other verses it becomes clear that God is responsible for making everything that exists (Jn 1:3, Col1:16). The statement that God 'creates evil' isn't easily accepted by most human beings, as they look up to Him as omnipotent, omniscient, and a strictly good eternal being. They ask 'How can a 'good' God 'create evil'?'. When confronted with this question, many theologians are even stumped and respond with something like "That is one of the great mysteries of our faith". However, a thorough reading of the Bible and a comprehensive understanding of its message reveals a relatively simple answer to this seemingly difficult question. Here is my response (that I try to make as simple as I can) to this difficult question for some people and I hope it helps those that are puzzled by the amount of evil in the world.

God created everything for His pleasure. In the creation plan, God desired all human beings to become His spiritual sons and daughters to live in Heaven with him for eternity. Since God has free will, He wanted His children to have free will and freely choose to be with Him forever. However, the only way, the human spirit would be able to live peacefully with Him would be by freely complying with His laws regarding spiritual relationships: His commandments. Compliance with these laws would also require a great deal of spiritual discipline on the part of each heavenly soul. While under development, each soul commits evil or sins in the sight of God, and each soul is refined by the knowledge acquired on good and evil. God is unchanging and absolute for all time, as well as his spiritual laws for relationships between heavenly beings. Evil is not tolerated in heaven. Disobedience to His spiritual laws results in evil and results in sin or conflict between Himself and His potential eternal heavenly children. To make matters worse, the heavy burden of regret is added to an eternal spiritual being that has sinned while on earth against God, other future heavenly beings, and others that will not make it to Heaven as a result of our sinful actions. Foregiveness helps, but it doesn't erase the memory of what those sinful decisions cost others. Constantly abiding by these commandments, guarantees peace and good will among all of heaven's inhabitant's for eternity.

God foreknew everything that would occur in His creation since all of this creation's physical laws are deterministic (all known laws discovered thus far). From God's perspective, there is no chance outcome, everything was determined before the creation was set in motion. God also foreknows how everything ends. God acts freely outside of our time and can act freely at any point in our time. He is omnipresent in both space and time. But He also wanted His children to have free will, so He needed a system of physical laws for this world that would support both determinism for foreknowledge and executing His plan and free will for His children to choose to obey His spiritual laws. Consequently, as Jesus said humans are both 'body and spirit'. The body and brain being the material aspect due to the physical laws and the spirit being a manifestation of the dynamic informational content of the human mind residing in the brain built from physical materials. The information in the brain can express free will, while physical matter based on deterministic laws does not have this capability. Spiritual information is the free will organization of matter. When we are born we are a free will blank sheet. Human spiritual characteristics are informational and defined over a person's lifetime by each individual's informational input and their free will decisions on what action to take. This information is recorded as physical patterns that change over time in the brain's extremely complex neuron interconnection structure and the soul's character imbedded in these patterns interacts with other new external information to produce new thought and actions. By intentional design of our body and spirit, God has a deterministic physical law connection to the brain to obtain foreknowledge of free will decisions in each individual and how their character turned out over their lifetimes.

He knew before He started this universe because of the way He designed it, the names of those who would rebel against His commandments and authority. Even knowing evil would be present in this world due to these free will decisions of each individual human that would ever live, He went ahead with His plan. He found this evil undesired but necessary in order to allow free will in the development His spiritually compatible children, the ones that would freely accept His spiritual laws and make the decision to try and live by them. It is a monumental task 'to be like God' as Satan trickfully enticed Adam and Eve to commit our path toward. So far only Jesus Christ has accomplished the mission but in God's time and with His grace other children will perhaps make the grade and be perfect. This is not a trivial process and one that contains inumerable trespasses, an extraordinary amount of foregiveness, and many changes in spiritual direction for each of us. All tolled, a mountain of evil would accummulate in this world and be paid for by one perfect spiritual being: God Himself, come to earth as Jesus Christ, the architect and the sacrifice. God created it all, but also paid the price for it all!

As a result of God's design, we can be a true child of God with free will and choose to become more like Him each and everyday of our existence. We need to do good instead of evil in God's sight to minimize our regrets and conflicts for eternity. Yes, God 'creates evil' as an unintended by product of free will, but it's for God's higher cause: to have more 'good' free souls like His that will live for eternity. Evil in this world is truly a consequence of free will decisions disobeying God's commandments. God's greater mission to enlarge His family and to eventually defeat evil for His heavenly souls justifies His decision: those accepting Jesus as their Lord, Saviour, and Holy Spirit as their guide for their thoughts and actions.

Lee cheers

View user profile

48 *** The Origin of Evil? *** on Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:07 am

Lee ...

I'm sorry to hear about your Mother!
I appreciate your concern about my well-being ... but when I accepted Jesus as my Lord and Savior
He freed me from ALL forms of bondage and the Evil Principalities that wield them!
Even though I'm not much of a drinker these days ... I do think that it's worth pointing out that Alcohol
is NOT sinful or evil ... but reveling in drunkenness is !!!
Food is NOT evil or sinful ... but it is gluttony that God warns us about!
Anything abused to the point of excess is sinful in God's eyes!
Not so much because it is unhealthful to us ... but because these things become idols to the abusers!

God did NOT create "Satan"... but instead He created Lucifer (the most perfect Angel of them all)...
who "chose" to turn against God (made possible by FREE WILL)... and Evil entered into God's creation!
The same logic holds true for Hitler and all the other Evildoers!
Yes! ... God knew that they would "choose" Evil instead of following His will ... but He did NOT cause them
to choose their path ... He basically had to allow for this to happen ... or He could never be truly loved ... !!!

Any Questions?


View user profile

49 Just Say No to Kool-Aid, Dopes and Alcohol on Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:44 am

You gave me quite a scare; I thought you went over the cliff with your cult buddies a few weeks ago after finishing off the Kool-Aid. My mother died many years ago from excessive drinking, so bad things really do happen to nice people as a result of substance abuse. You need to kick your habit so you can keep your mind rational and your path straight toward eternity with God. I hope you will be able to stay away from the Ketel-One, dopey substances, and anything else your buddies try to get you to drink or lust for before you have totally lost your mind or hallucinate your way over the cliff.

Your last post, suggests that you are still imbibing (or imagining) and rationalizing that the Bible is saying something that it is clearly not. Why would you search so extensively for a verse to justify your popping viewpoint or a specific phrase 'change one species to a different species' to support my view when there are so many other verses that are there stating that God grows plants, animals, and humans from their seed and He created each of us in the womb with the characteristics He wanted. The evidence that God did not pop new fully formed mature species into existence is right in front of you. It's like the YEs and your buddies have caused you to be mentally challenged and unable to comprehend what these verses are telling you or integrate them into your views. Evil or bad information like gossip, porn, hate literature can be just as addictive as substances like alcohol. The YE cult party line may have similarly poisoned your mind and its ability to accept other valid and truthful information as well as Bible verses. The mind savors all kinds of additions including cult comradery (and greatly biased data to support the cult's views) and they are hard to get rid of since the ego, and psyche, suffer their loss. This may be why you hold fast to certain Bible phrases but ignore and reject other verses that are most pertinent. I hope you can snap out of this addiction.

I was a little shocked that you were proud of me on my points regarding Darwinism. I have made similar points in my previous posts but you must have missed them. It seems to me that we only disagree on whether the God guided modifications necessary to create new species accumulated generation by generation through natural birth over a very long period of time, as opposed to your view that, all plant and animal kinds were popped into existence instantaneously in new fully formed and mature animals over a period of 3 24 hour days. Of course I take the former position based on proper exegesis of the Bible and the YEs hallucinate or invent the later position without any Biblical verses to support this claim. The YEs have never produced any rational Biblical evidence for popping animals and plants instantaneously into existence. We've addressed Ge 1 verses already, and a careful reading of all the words proved to be counter to your position on it about supporting instantaneous creation of all animal kinds. If there are others that you have found please identify them, otherwise we must assume your position is Biblically bankrupt. Also, if there are other differences, please let me know on which points in my last post that you disagree and why exactly, so that I can address them.

I believe the following is the primary issue: God popping out all plants an animals in three days using greatly accelerated laws of physics versus God manipulating genetic codes, controlling procreation of each individual species using nature, and using the earth and waters to bring forth (or grow) all kinds of plants and animals sequentually from a common ancestor over hundreds of millions of years. I've found hundreds of verses related to God controlling the procreation of animals, humans, and plants by bringing forth (Hebrew word yatsa) progeny from their 'seed' (Hebrew word zera). It is Biblically clear from these verses that God is involved with the reproduction and characteristics of every plant, animal, and human that ever existed as well as everyone that will be ever made.

Here again is my ninth point from the last referenced post below. It shows clearly shows that God generates all life forms by growing them from 'seed' and not by popping them into existence instantaneously.

'The authors of the Bible make many references to 'seed'; in the YLT the word was used 254 times and many were statements by God himself. In most cases it is to people and descendent nations of people, and at other times to plants, and other times to animals. Je 31:27, Is 59:21, Ge 1:11, Ge 3:15, Ge 7:3 & 1 Cor 15:38 I know this because I have read every one of these 254 verses. Even Jesus was referred to as a seed. Is 65:9 This common usage of the same word by God indicates a common viewpoint by him toward how all multicellular life is generated, the process of being grown to maturity from a seed (a fertilized single cell from the union of two parental gametes) based on the information that He controls and provides in each seed. God ties all life forms together symbolically and also documents for us the process that He used in this physically accurate expression. God and the prophets are letting us know that God uses the same process for making all life forms. This is overwhelming support for evolutionary creation and against popping animals into existence ex nihilo.'

Ps 89:29 And I have set his seed for ever, And his throne as the days of the heavens.

Jer 31:27 YLT Lo, days are coming, an affirmation of Jehovah, And I have sown the house of Israel, And the house of Judah, With seed of man, and seed of beast.

Is 61:9 YLT And known among nations hath been their seed, And their offspring in the midst of the peoples, All their beholders acknowledge them, For they [are] a seed Jehovah hath blessed.

I have also provided extensive posts on these topics and referencing the Biblical supporting verses as well. Yet, the YEs avoid and never respond to these verses and my claims based on these verses.

I think you see the conflicts between these verses with your view but are afraid to address them and are avoiding a response. If you had reasonable rebuttal to my points, I would expect to see them instead of the constant attempts at character assasination in your replies! Please, see the following post for more details:

1) Yatsá Verses Implying Natural Procreation
2) No Question That Ge 1 Describes Evolutionary Creation, Just How Do You Convolute It To Justify Your View?
3) No God Time?
4) Did God Really Say?
5) Biblical Evidence for Evolutionary Creationism for Dummys


You have a face saving way out though; join the battle against Darwinsts as an Evolutionary Creationist! In this way you can be both technically and Biblically correct as we battle the non-believers like Darwin setting the record straight on the side of truth. Arrow

For many years now, it has been obvious to me and others that unguided evolution is the real issue with Darwinism. Your erroneous YE views (1)the ridiculously short age of the earth, 2)death and decay starting after the original sin, and 3)your imagined divine opposition to create macro evolutionary jumps in genetic code) only serve as a distraction for addressing the real issue of whether God is in control or not. God said that He made everything, and the non-believer has looked from all angles to find a way to leave God out of it. Bret, as you said in your last post, God 'controls every single molecule'. If you carry this concept into reproduction, it puts God back in charge of the reproductive process and centers Him at the control of every change made to the genetic code, every allele expressed and which organisms will be capable of reproduction. This is in direct opposition to what Darwin postulated as a random chance event. If you read about the history of Darwinism, this is the same issue that the Catholic Church had and contemporaries of Charles Darwin like Asa Gray (friend of Darwin and early evolutionary creationist) and AR Wallace (co-inventor of the evolution concept) had with Charles Darwin's viewpoint. Darwin's contempories who were devote Christians insisted the natural processes of modification and selection that Darwin described were God guided natural ones and Darwin insisted that they were not, Darwin introduced the concept of modification by chance. That basically is where Darwin went wrong, since God tells us that nothing is left to chance because He foreknew everything that would happen.

You also have taken issue with one of the Biblical verses that I referenced. The Hebrew key words in Is 45:7 are

רע ברא
ברא Pronunciation Bará  'Definition: A primitive root; (absolutely) to create; (qualified) to cut down (a wood), select, feed (as formative processes):--choose, create (creator), cut down, dispatch, do, make (fat).
 רע -Pronunciation ra` Definition bad or (as noun) evil (naturally or morally). This includes the second (feminine) form; as adjective or noun:--adversity, affliction, bad, calamity, + displease (-ure), distress, evil ([-favouredness], man, thing), + exceedingly, X great, grief (-vous), harm, heavy, hurt (-ful), ill (favoured), + mark, mischief, (-vous), misery, naught (-ty), noisome, + not please, sad (-ly), sore, sorrow, trouble, vex, wicked (-ly, -ness, one), worse (-st) wretchedness, wrong. [Including feminine ra'ah; as adjective or noun.]

Your original favorite versions the KJV, YLT, ASV each translate this Hebrew phrase as 'create evil' while you say 'create disaster'. I can only assume that your different translation is because of your position that God does not create evil. Below are the translation of the original Hebrew words. My position is that God made and continues to make everything with foreknowledge and some of that 'everything' was made to be 'evil'. God created Satan, Ahab, Hitler, Stalin, Ghengis Khan, serial killers, and other mass murders. God foreknew who they would turn out to be and did it anyway as part of his plan to teach his children about good and evil and consequently to accomplish a greater 'good' ultimately in the end. This is so that God would would have new sons and daughters that directly experience good and evil and are willing to make a conscious free will decision to overcome and reject this evil in their lives for eternity with God.

You obviously disagree with my position as well as God's statement recorded in the KJV, YLT, ASV Bible translations. Please explain why you disagree with this foundational statement that God made: He creates evil and he creates everything.

Lee geek

Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:39 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Added reference verse, corrected reference verse)

View user profile

50 *** Where Lee went wrong! *** on Wed Apr 18, 2012 3:52 pm

It wasn't the KOOL-AID that got me! ... It was the Ketel-One that I used to mix it with that took me out! drunken
All kidding aside ... I'm going to have to agree with Lee on this one! affraid
Darwin and the Bible don't mix !!!
Not only that ... but I'm proud of Lee for admitting that Darwin & Science don't mix as well ... !!!
I agree that God created ALL things GOOD !!!
And ... that God has total and complete control of every single molecule!

But ... when it comes to EVIL ... I tend to believe that it arose as a unwanted byproduct of Freewill?
Isaiah 45:7 is better translated "I bring prosperity and create disaster"(NIV) or "Causing well-being and creating calamity"(NASB)!

I read every single Bible verse that Lee listed (in multiple translations)... but just could NOT find ANYTHING that eluded to a "CHANGE"
from one Species to a different Species during the process of procreation?
In fact! ... God seemed to go out of His way (several times) to state that His creations would only reproduce after their "Own Kind" !!!
And ... every single piece of Scientific evidence seems to back up this assertion by God as well ... !!!
Of course ... there can be a lot of "variation" within these kinds ... as best shown by Man's artificial selection with the Dog kind!
But ... when you mate ANY two of these various breeds ... you ALWAYS end-up with just another Dog!
I've been intensely studying the "claims" of Evolution for over 20-years now! ... and I have yet to find a single Scientific Fact
to support the "theory" of Macro-Evolution !!! (Inference + Hyperbole ... a "Fact" does not make!)


View user profile

51 Where Darwin Went Wrong on Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:21 am

All biological life forms weren't a result of random chance mutations and natural selection as Darwin postulated. Instead the Bible tells us that God makes changes to the genetic code in all species during procreation generation by generation. God further establishes control on what life forms procreate by natural/divine selection and not unguided natural selection. I was surprised during the investigation of this topic about how well the Bible described this evolutionary process; one only needs to read the Bible in its entirety to see the widely distributed evidence on how God controls the process. It has become clear to those that have studied Darwin's history that Darwin intentionally was trying to introduce an atheistic concept into biological evolution as he (Darwin) did not believe in God's existence as he enlisted on the Beagle. Unfortunately for him and for huminity, Darwin's views are in direct conflict with many verses in the Bible. Below are verses that support the view that God created all things good and evil whereas Darwin proposed that the modifications over time were unguided and a result of chance.

Col 1:16 because in him were the all things created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things through him, and for him, have been created, 17and himself is before all, and the all things in him have consisted.
Jn 1:3 all things through him did happen, and without him happened not even one thing that hath happened.
Is 41:4 Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I, Jehovah, the first, and with the last, I am he.
Is 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Yahweh, who does all these things.

As we clearly see from the verses above and contrary to what Charles Darwin claimed, God made everything including all biological life forms. So how did God do it and how was he involved in the process? Other Biblical statements clarify this and are listed in the following paragraphs.

Darwin insisted that the evolutionary process was unguided or undirected by God. Of course atheists would clearly take this view. However, the Bible in the verse below tells us that God has foreknowledge of the evolutionary process for His entire creation.

Is 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; 'I am' God, and there is none like me; 10declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not 'yet' done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;

Here is a simple question for those Christian Darwinists: How can God declare 'the end from the beginning' and not have guided or pre-determined the result. There are a number of Christian theistic evolutionists supporting Darwin's unguided viewpoint that are in direct conflict with God's own statement which follows. It is clear to me that these theistic evolutionists haven't either read this verse, are misinterpreting it, or do not believe God's own statement. These people are responsible for misleading large number of Christians and the non-believing world!

Darwinists, claim that an unguided natural process determines which animals are selected to procreate or multiply in numbers. This is in direct conflict with several patriarch's and God's own statement in the verses below which clearly state that God control's the selection process. These verses indicate that God controls nature including the elements (like rain, lightning, wind), the selective ability for individuals to reproduce which is genetic or biological, and hierarchilogically based on the individual's and species importance to God.

Mt 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? and not one of them shall fall on the ground without your Father: 30but the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows.
Ge 20:18 For the LORD had caused infertility to strike every woman in the household of Abimelech because he took Sarah, Abraham's wife. -
Ge 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the ground.
Ex 14:21-22 NIV 21 Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the LORD drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, 22 and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left.

Darwin claimed that modifications in each generation resulted from parental characteristics being passed down generation by generation. Darwin claimed these modifications occurred by random chance and that the resulting rare beneficial modifications passed down would become dominant in the species due to the selective advantage that resulted. Although Darwin was correct about modifications being passed down generation by generation, this view is partially in conflict with the following Biblical statements because the Biblical statements disallow random chance determining either the modification or the selection of the individual for procreation. The Bible tells us that God guided each modification and whether each individual would procreate or not. The Bible tells us that God intentionally formed each creature by growing its seed naturally in the parent's womb into a new individual. Its seed (or embryo in the human species) was modified by God from its parent's genetic code as we now know. The primary issue between Darwin's view here and God's view is related to random chance vs divine plan. Darwinist's believe that chance or luck can replace the role of God. The Bible as well as good science tells us that Darwinism is not a truthful statement; God controls all events and what are thought to be chance outcomes are preplanned events or events that God directly planned at the beginning of the universe and has executed at a precise time throughout history. Random chance cannot replace design or guided modification of genetic code from a scientific basis. Statistically random chance fails the scientific test for the origination of life, proteins and processes with irreducible complexity, and the rapid divergence of multi-cellular life forms during the Cambrian Explosion among others. Only an omniscient designer or God possessed the skill to create the complex first life form, make the complex changes to it necessary to create the thousands of nano-machines in the biological cell, to incrementally devolop it into vast numbers of intricate and complex interdependent processes, and evolve the diverse array of biological life with each being unique on this planet. Random chance can't hold a candle to the blinding light of the Grand Designer who illuminated this world with the vast amount of information which created, reproduces, and governs all life forms.

1 Cor 15:38-39 YLT 38and God doth give to it a body according as He willed, and to each of the seeds its proper body. 39All flesh [is] not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another of fishes, and another of birds;

When referring to the ostrich and behemoth, God made them as well as us by the same process but without wisdom:

Jb 39:17 NIV For God did not endow her with wisdom, or give her a share of good sense
Jb 40:15 NIV Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox

In the following verses, the Bible explains that God creates the individual in the womb and sometimes grows their descendents into nations.

Ge 25:23 ASV And Jehovah said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, And two peoples shall be separated from thy bowels. And the one people shall be stronger than the other people. And the elder shall serve the younger.
Ps 139:13 NET Certainly you made my mind and heart; you wove me together in my mother’s womb. ESV For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.
Je 1:5 'Before I form thee in the belly, I have known thee; and before thou comest forth from the womb I have separated thee, a prophet to nations I have made thee.'
Is 46:3 ASV Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, that have been borne by me from their birth, that have been carried from the womb

In the following verses, God tells us directly that He knows our every thought and can control our decisions and actions. The indicates that He can if desired, control the natural selection process. Consequently, natural selection is turned to divine/natural selection. Their is also strong evidence that God can influence the minds of bacteria, viruses, flies, locusts, frogs, birds and other animals as well to guide their behavior (Ex 9:2-4, Ex 8:20-21, Ex 10:4-6, Ex 16:13, 7:2, Lk 5:4-6). The accounts of Noah gathering pairs of animals, quail falling from the sky to cover the Hebrew camp ground in the desert, and Jesus causing the fish to enter His disciples nets, and plagues provide this evidence. God can clearly use both the human and animal mind to control events in this world which greatly impact the course of natural/divine selection. In this and other ways, He controls the evolutionary process.

2 Kings 19:27 But I know thy sitting down, and thy going out, and thy coming in, and thy raging against me.
Isaiah 37:7 Look, I will take control of his mind; he will receive a report and return to his own land. I will cut him down with a sword in his own land."'"
Jeremiah 17:10 I, the LORD, probe into people's minds. I examine people's hearts. I deal with each person according to how he has behaved. I give them what they deserve based on what they have done.

It seems to me and other Evolutionary Creationsists that Darwin got only one point right. God evolved all plants and creatures through procreation, generation by generation, using the earth, waters, thought control, and natural elements to do it. When the Biblical statements are understood, integrated into a meaningful concept as to how life was created on the earth, and compared with Darwinism, we are left with the following phrase: The Origin of the Species According to the Original Plan by Means of Divine Modification and Selection. Here is a verse (the only verse I could find) that actually supports the small portion of Darwin's views that he got right. It is sad, that he didn't read, understand, or believe the remainder of the Bible.

Ge 1:11 ....., `Let the earth yield tender grass, herb sowing seed, fruit-tree (whose seed [is] in itself) making fruit after its kind, on the earth:' and it is so.
12And the earth bringeth forth tender grass, herb sowing seed after its kind, and tree making fruit (whose seed [is] in itself) after its kind; ....

It is a false teaching for the secular community and many Christians to claim that Darwinism is true and proven. This claim ignores the fact that random chance modification of genetic codes when analyzed scientifically will not support the actual historical time frames during the creation of life nor the Cambrian Explosion, nor the near impossibility of getting a molecular motor (or many other nanomachines) that exudes irreducible complexity by periodic random mutations. God must have guided these supposed random events to make sense of what we observe according to the time frames recorded in history.

Lee study elephant pig albino rendeer monkey cat alien Like a Star @ heaven

Last edited by InfinitLee on Tue Apr 17, 2012 4:27 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : missing word)

View user profile

52 Can anyone explain to me...? on Sun Apr 15, 2012 5:24 am

Why do so many English speaking people write 'of' where they should write 'have'?
(but his cult must of forced him to finish it off.)
Is this the devolution of the English language?

View user profile

53 I Hope the Intellectual Suicides Are Now Over on Sun Apr 15, 2012 1:23 am


It looks like Bret acted on his statement and drank the rest of his cup of KOOL-AID. What a shame! I tried to talk him out of it, but his cult must have forced him to finish it off. It now seems there is no one that will try to defend the cult's popping into existence view for the great diversity of life on this planet. Lucien and Stu, haven't provided anything of substance or Biblical verses either to support their view. What a pity! It looks like an excellently played out hoax and distortion of the Bible as it was described by our ICR and 'traditional' posters. So we now have to wait for a new defender of the ICR (or YE) and 'traditional' position; one that can actually defend their position logically and Biblically. Oh well, this is nothing new, it has been going on for three years now. It seems there is no Biblical or reality based case for what they believe; what they presented so far are clear distortions and bad exegesis based on misreading and misrepresentation of Biblical verses.

In the meantime, I will continue the climb of Mt. Impossible alone if necessary. This mission is too important to abandon! Evidently, I am the only one that thinks so and willing to take the abuse that accompanies the journey.


Last edited by InfinitLee on Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:16 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : grammar)

View user profile

View user profile

55 Don't Drink Any More of the Kool-Aid!! on Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:06 am

Snap out of it Bret! You're not in touch with reality! It seems you've consumed some of the Kool-Aid already. It's starting to affect your mind and your ability to logically analyze reality. 

Your statements indicate a lack of knowledge related to the history of languages, history of the Bible, and the immense differences in views held by people living throughout history related to creation.  The following paragraphs explain this.

Just because 'Day' normally applies to a human day of 24 hours doesn't mean that  it applies to all cases of it's usage, especially in terms of God's 'Days' of creation in chapter 1 of Genesis.   

Contrary to your statement,  there are many 'sheeople', as you call them, that believe that these days are extended periods of time.  Many people believe that these days are symbolically used here in reference to human work days and our seven day week.  Please read the Presbyterian Church in America Report of the Creation Study Committee, June 2000 or the Westminster Theological Seminary and the Days of Creation statement (1999) to see how your viewpoint is invalid.

It is mostly the cultish Morris followers in the ICR that insist that God's 'Day' in Genesis 1 must strictly be a 24-hour day. 

Furthermore, you must to be hallucinating now as I have never ever even entertained your view below.  It seems you've made another irrational and brash statement while in the ICR zombielike state while attempting another character assassination of me:

Bret: "When someone comes along thousands of years later ... and says with indignant absolution that EVERYONE else on this planet has gotten it wrong."

People through the ages have not always believed  the Genesis 1 Hebrew 'yowm' usage meant a 24 hour day as you fallaciously state.  There were many views expressed as to how long these 'days' were; St. Augustine for one expressed great confusion on this topic in his writings. 

From the report: "Augustine, himself, as is well known, states in connection with the days of Genesis 1, "What kind of days these were it is extremely difficult, or perhaps impossible for us to conceive."(1)

Anselm may be read to follow this lead in his supposition that "the 'days' of Moses' account ... are not to be equated with the days in which we live."(2)"

I have already stated that I support the use of 'day' in Genesis 1 as it can mean several lengths of time. The definition of 'day' meaning 24 hours is relatively recent in English speaking history. The English word 'day' has not existed for thousands of years nor has it meant 24 hours only over history as you state above.  Several languages predated the  modern English versions we read today:  Hebrew, Latin, Greek including variations within each language over several thousand years.   'Day' meaning 24 hours was not used in these languages. Its translation in Genesis 1 to the modern word English word 'day' and widespread usage of the word 'day' is  based on the Hebrew word 'Yowm'  including earlier Latin and greek translations of it when  Miles Cloverdale published the first English translation in 1535 AD.  The printing press made the Bible accessible to large numbers of English speaking people.  Prior to that, the Latin Vulgate version was spoken in English churches since the Bible had limited access.  This is less than 600 years ago not thousands as you state.  Check out my previous post, a modern dictionary to look at all of the definitions of the word 'day' and the Wikipedia link for the pertinent history.

Secondly my indignant posts only applies to your rigid  ICR interpretation of the word 'day' meaning only 24 hours.   Most of the world's population, many Biblical scholars, and virtually all scientists disagree with your interpretation of the Bible on this point.  It is the ICR and their Young Earth followers saying with absolute indignation that EVERYONE else is wrong.

I see you're intent on knocking me off the mountain into the Abyss of Young Earth Creationism. However, I am not giving up with the climb of Mount Impossible.  I plead with you to not drive your bus full of YE followers like a zombie over the precipice into the abyss.  Reality is too important for me to ignore and I'm watching your every move to avoid your throwing me under it while on your way to oblivion.  

We debated the age of the earth for over two years where you had plenty of opportunity to provide your irrationale, it is time to stop pestering us with this nonsense again.   I plan to ignore your endless banter on this front henceforth. I hope you don't mind if I focus on 'natural God guided evolution' from here out since that is how God himself said that he created living things and clearly states his involvement.  (GE 1:11-12, GE 1:20-21, GE 1:24-25, Is 41:4. Job 38:41, Is 29:16, Is 40:21-26, Is 43:1, Mt 10:29,  1Cor 15:38-39, GE 20:18, GE 7:4, Je 1:5,  Is 4:24, Jb 31:15, GE 24:23,  Jb 39:17,  Lk 1:35, and many other verses. It is up to you to defend your popping view if you disagree with His statements of guided and controlled evolution referenced above.  

You may claim he pops things into existence but God himself and the Bible state that he evolves everything generation by generation and controls whether they live, die, and procreate. You need to jump off the YE bus and stop drinking Kool Aid while you still have some brain tissue left.  

Lee Sad

Quotes from Reports
Excerpt from the Westminster Statement: “In the fourteen centuries prior to the Westminster Assembly numerous commentaries on the days of creation in Genesis 1-2 were produced. Frank Egleston Robbins in his The Hexaemeral Literature: A Study of the Greek and Latin Commentaries on Genesis (Chicago: U. of Chicago Press, 1912) lists more than 130 authors of works on the six days of creation from Origen in the 3rd century to John Milton in the 17th century.1 Robert Letham in his more recent article “‘In the Space of Six Days’: The Days of Creation from Origen to the Westminster Assembly,” Westminster Theological Journal 61:2 (Fall 1999), adds several more to the list, including many whose writings the Westminster Divines would have known.
Out of all of this literature it is possible to distinguish two general schools of thought on the nature of the six days. One class of interpreters tends to interpret the days figuratively or allegorically (e.g., Origen and Augustine), while another class interprets the days as normal calendar days (e.g., Basil, Ambrose, Bede and Calvin). From the early church, however, the views of Origen, Basil, Augustine and Bede seem to have had the greatest influence on later thinking. While they vary in their interpretation of the days, all recognize the difficulty presented by the creation of the sun on the fourth day.”
Excerpt from the PCA report: “The Committee has been unable to come to unanimity over the nature and duration of the creation days.”

Last edited by InfinitLee on Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:31 am; edited 2 times in total (Reason for editing : Corrected and Added Links)

View user profile

Sponsored content

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 9]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum