Did God use evolution to create life

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

If we want to claim people are off base (dysphoric) and therfore reject their notions, it is a two way street. When the leader of a religious movement goes off the deep end, look out.

...

I almost thought we were talking about Charles darwin who was living out his days in nearly a psychotic trance.

...

http://darwin-legend.org/html/darwins-illness.htm

There, see? Even [LUCID] coadie posts the link. The other "coadie" (a.k.a. ["Crack Pipe"] coadie won't).

The site linked above has some good information, though it is slanted with a somewhat cranky sense of irony. That's okay too, I feel the same way sometimes. However, this discussion of "Darwin's illness" particularly lacks a lot of factual details. The writer focuses ONLY upon Darwin's moods. There is a rather glaring avoidance of the physical pathologies involved that were described in detail by both Darwin and his contemporaries.

One major reason he avoided public appearances more and more after his return from the Beagle voyage was because of his constant need for the loo. This embarrassing debility kept him at home for years. It no doubt contributed to his "depression" - however it should also give us a clue that "darwin-legend.org" ignores entirely.

Just go into your doctor's office and inform your physician that you've returned from an around the world sailing adventure. Add details of how you camped out at night (discovering many new species of insects and parasites) and how that all of the water you drank was from untreated sources from dozens of tropical locales. Then add the fact that you've been feeling rather "down" and that you simply can't live without a chamber pot always handy a few feet away.

Will your doctor diagnose "Depression" and send you to a shrink? Or, will your doctor ask to see your chamber pot so the lab can analyze your stool?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles...gas_hypothesis

Since no one conducted a lab analysis of the suffering patient's stool and blood, nor was a careful postmortem performed, we are left to guess at the clues. Ignoring the disease and infectious elements of the problem as "darwin-legend.org" has done reveals more of an agenda at work and less of an objective inquiry.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

The words "God" and "DO" suddenly remove the use of the word evolution.
The correct term is creation. Form shape as Jeremy says. It is fascinating how many more restrictions are built into the changes possible. Darwin thot it was an accident.




Allele and the frequency of one of the alleles is a/(n*N) tells us how often a family has a redheaded kid. But there are no new and unique hair coolours. Diploid genes grant a new number of chances but with reastrictions. Even junk DNA is not junk as once thought. Lot and Abrams stripe /spot heards were an example of deviations from Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium.

But we still aren't getting evolution. Definiotely do not see the high quantity of info added to the genome to cause novel structures.

You may have been thinking of Laban's herds (Genesis 30:34 and following). Perhaps you could explain how whittling poplar branches will affect the frequency of the haploid n selections.

Or, perhaps not. Anyhoo...

The "problem" of "no new and unique hair coolours" was answered back in the 1980s with the Punk Rock Movement. If you are reaching for the "No New Information Can Be Added To the Gene Pool" argument, that has been debunked so many times that it really deserves its own thread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Mutation

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-...o-biology.html

And a briefer discussion is found here:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html

The words "God" and "Do" - DO NOT remove evolution from the discussion. The selective breeding as practiced by Jacob in Genesis 30, involves Micro-Evolution to be effective.

Did "God" "do" the selection of the animals? Perhaps, using Jacob? Maybe, it at least appears so. Whatever happened, the end result was a process of Micro-Evolution.

I don't have any explanation for Jacob's attendant use of Sympathetic Magic (whittling the bark off of poplar sticks so that they would appear to be "spotted" and so forth), nor for that matter, other uses of Sympathetic Magic in the Bible (2 Kings 2:21, 2 Kings 6:5-7; Mark 7:33-34 and many others).

Jesus "could have" healed that deaf man by simply speaking the Word! Why He chose to do things the way He did (mixing mud), I don't know (Romans 9:20). For some reason He often appears to be mixing the elements from the earth to produce a desired outcome.

[BroGary]

Originally Posted by coadie

Could God contradict Himself?

31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Genesis 2
1Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

The Word of God is a sure foundation, and it does indeed support creation and not evolution.

Here is a very good video (in parts 1-6) that is called "Ultimate Proof of Creation"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-21H...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rCU3...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEYnG...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR9xB...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpUmK...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXdbh...ayer_embedded#

!

[coadie]

I just laugh so loud when an evolutionist says i need an interpretor to read the book of Genesis. When they say it can't be taken litterally, I ask for them to write some verses that are correct and can be taken literally. All the cowards can't. The words in the chapter are simple. the numbers are small.
I have the main Mormon scriptures. At Least Joseph smith put his special revelations in writing.

History of the creation.

1 And it came to pass, that the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Behold, I reveal unto you concerning this heaven and this earth; write the words which I speak.

2 I am the Beginning and the End; the Almighty God. By mine Only Begotten I created these things.

3 Yea, in the beginning I created the heaven, and the earth upon which thou standest.

4 And the earth was without form, and void; and I caused darkness to come up upon the face of the deep.

5 And my Spirit moved upon the face of the waters, for I am God.

6 And I, God, said, Let there be light, and there was light.

7 And I, God, saw the light, and that light was good. And I, God, divided the light from the darkness.

8 And I, God, called the light day, and the darkness I called night. And this I did by the word of my power; and it was done as I spake. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

9 And again, I, God, said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters; and it was so, even as I spake. And I said, Let it divide the waters from the waters; and it was done.

10 And I, God, made the firmament, and divided the waters; yea, the great waters under the firmament, from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so, even as I spake.
This is the boldest verse in the first chapter.

27 And I, God, said unto mine Only Begotten, which was with me from the beginning, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and it was so.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by BroGary

.......Acts 17:18
Then certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him. And some said, “What does this babbler want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign gods,” because he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection.

In the greater context, we find Paul forced into a debate with Epicureans and Stoics. In fact, because they disagreed with him, they take him to Mars Hill (the Areopagus) to defend his views in front of the whole crowd of philosophers. So, Paul masterfully begins his defense, which has gone on to become the basis for creation evangelism.

The Epicureans were the evolutionists of the day!

(end of excerpt from link below)

http://www.answersingenesis.org/arti...-evolutionists

All the Greek schools patterned after the Platonic and Aristotelean philosophies included at least some observations of the natural world. Some of the observations (like the subsequent Ptolemaic system of astronomy) might have had "good math" behind them, but they lacked important information - like the fact that Jupiter had moons - that was simply technologically unavailable at the time.

How did this new knowledge become available? Through "creation evangelism?" No. "Creation evangelism" like that practiced at AIG subtracts good information and causes monstrous "mutations" to occur within the realm of discussion.

It's odd that both you and Mr. Bodie at AIG would claim that Paul was "arguing against evolution..." That issue wasn't even under discussion. Instead, what did Paul really "argue" on Mars Hill?

First, Paul appeals to the work and legacy of the pagan philosopher Epimenides of Crete. It was Epimenides who went around the Eastern Mediterranean world erecting altars to "The Unknown God" (Acts 17:23).



We'll have to wait until we're all in glory together to ask St. Paul why he would extol the virtues of a guy who wouldn't even wear pants. Paul then goes on to quote Epimenides without attribution in Acts 17:27-28 (a). I doubt seriously that Paul was claiming this idea for his own because they would have been immediately recognizable to his audience. Instead, Paul is incorporating the ideas of the Greek philosophers.

"For in Him we move and live and have our being."

Epimenides' original words were:

They fashioned a tomb for thee, O holy and high one—
The Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies!
But thou art not dead: thou livest and abidest forever,
For in thee we live and move and have our being.

The "tomb" in question was located near Knossos on the island of Crete. An elaborate ceremonial tomb of great antiquity existed there and in Greek times it was "rededicated" to the Greek god Zeus. The idea that the "All Father" Zeus would ever require a tomb was repugnant to Athenians and other Greeks. Paul skirts these squabbles and simply says, "Zeus the All Father is ... er, I mean The Unknown God is the God of us all... Let me prove it by quoting a hymn dedicated to Zeus!"

In the second part of Acts 17:28 ("as certain also of your own poets have said...") Paul proceeds to quote a Hellenistic work called Phenomena by the popular poet Aratus. The phrase "his offspring" again refers to Zeus.

Let us begin with Zeus, whom we mortals never leave unspoken.
For every street, every market-place is full of Zeus.
Even the sea and the harbour are full of this deity.
Everywhere everyone is indebted to Zeus.
For we are indeed his offspring... (Phaenomena 1-5).

So, "how do you argue with an evolutionist?" By making appeals to pagan deities? I guess. According to these guys. But why argue at all. Just accept reality.

(The real truth behind what Paul said is a bit more complicated and involves the development of Hellenistic monotheism and Neo-Platonism - but that too would require a whole thread of its own).

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by BroGary

The Word of God is a sure foundation, and it does indeed support creation and not evolution.

You are wrong to set the reality of biological evolution against "creation." God did "create the heavens and the earth." Along the way, biological evolution occurred together with almost a zillion other natural processes.

You have yet to address that reality. Nor have you answered ANY of the questions that I have asked you. Both you and coadie (both "coadies") simply follow the tired old YEC methodology. Deceive - and when questioned about the deception, start throwing out large amounts of random bits hoping to boggle the minds of your audience.

I bought Lisle's book when it first came out a while back. I was hoping that from all of the hype there might actually be something new - or at least something original. It's just a retread of AIG's website and cartoons.

The Word of God is sure and certain. Lisle and Ken Ham, not so much.

There's a free download of an mp3 of Dr. Hugh Ross setting Jason Lisle right about the age of the earth here: http://apologetics315.blogspot.com/2...le-debate.html

Lisle earned appears to have earned an authentic PhD in astrophysics studying the surface and subsurface of the sun. It takes about 8 minutes for light from the sun to reach the earth, not a problem for Lisle. However, he flunks other areas of study where the light source and stars are more than 6,000 light years away.

http://mblogs.discovermagazine.com/b...rs-in-genesis/

His "ultimate proof" isn't even offered in his book by that name because he ends up having to qualify and mitigate all of the boasting in the title throughout the book. He ends up with a plea sounding like a kid saying, "Here's a neat idea. Isn't it?" Hardly "ultimate" and certainly not "proof" of anything.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

I just laugh so loud when an evolutionist says i need an interpretor to read the book of Genesis. When they say it can't be taken litterally, I ask for them to write some verses that are correct and can be taken literally. All the cowards can't. The words in the chapter are simple. the numbers are small. ...

You're whistling in a graveyard coadie. (BTW, I am honored to be quoted in your sig line).

I never said YOU needed "an interpreter." I said that YOU needed to get some fresh air.

And it's odd to see you talk about "cowards" who don't respond to your challenges. You haven't answered a single thing I have ever asked you in the past year. You haven't even responded to my explanations of Genesis. You just go on, calling names, calling me a "liar" for stating well accepted scientific facts, whining when I point out the whoppers you tell... Do try and get some air. I noticed that you became a bit more lucid after I recommended that. Something's working!

[BroGary]

Originally Posted by BroGary

The Word of God is a sure foundation, and it does indeed support creation and not evolution.

Here is a very good video (in parts 1-6) that is called "Ultimate Proof of Creation"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-21H...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rCU3...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEYnG...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR9xB...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpUmK...ayer_embedded#

!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXdbh...ayer_embedded#

!

Folks, check the videos out for yourself, nothing personal against anyone, but those who believe in evolution are going to scoff and dismiss it, that is to be expected, so I don't hold any hard feelings.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by BroGary

Folks, check the videos out for yourself, nothing personal against anyone, but those who believe in evolution are going to scoff and dismiss it, that is to be expected, so I don't hold any hard feelings.

You just won't respond will you? You came busting into this thread calling names and throwing at one line put downs. You have consistently refused to answer any questions. Why do you even post on a forum? Just to put up spam from Youtube?

Have you even watched these videos? I took the time to read the book. Lisle's "Ultimate Proof" is circular reasoning and sophistry. "Believe me because I believe the Bible..." That's his "Ultimate." Yea, well what if your interpretation and hermeneutics are demonstrated to be wrong? Your audience will end up throwing out the Bible without ever considering a view point that doesn't conflict with reality.

"Folks" - Get an education. Attend accredited universities and colleges and go in with an open mind. Shop around if you aren't equipped to deal with the Liberal Political Agendas. There are plenty of excellent schools with actual Regional Accreditation.

Young Earth Creationism belongs in the same dust bin as "Dr." Stoneking's "Holy Magic Hair." Both rely upon the same wistful thinking and neither can survive in an open discussion. Just look at the way "Dr." Stoneking refuses to publicly discuss his "theory." Compare that to the way BroGary refuses to discuss his creationism.

[BroGary]

Originally Posted by pelathais

You just won't respond will you? You came busting into this thread calling names and throwing at one line put downs. You have consistently refused to answer any questions. Why do you even post on a forum? Just to put up spam from Youtube?

Have you even watched these videos? I took the time to read the book. Lisle's "Ultimate Proof" is circular reasoning and sophistry. "Believe me because I believe the Bible..." That's his "Ultimate." Yea, well what if your interpretation and hermeneutics are demonstrated to be wrong? Your audience will end up throwing out the Bible without ever considering a view point that doesn't conflict with reality.

"Folks" - Get an education. Attend accredited universities and colleges and go in with an open mind. Shop around if you aren't equipped to deal with the Liberal Political Agendas. There are plenty of excellent schools with actual Regional Accreditation.

Young Earth Creationism belongs in the same dust bin as "Dr." Stoneking's "Holy Magic Hair." Both rely upon the same wistful thinking and neither can survive in an open discussion. Just look at the way "Dr." Stoneking refuses to publicly discuss his "theory." Compare that to the way BroGary refuses to discuss his creationism.

No offense, but your kind of response is expected, and the evidence I posted speaks for itself, you have a free will right to disagree, but I will hold fast to the Bible truth of creation.