How God can create through evolution:

[RickD]

crochet wrote:
God creating Through evolution. The Problem , as I have understood it -- is that No one can seem to explain the Origin Of.

That's not true. Talk origins believes in evolution, and they explain the origin of life as God.

Other non-theistic evolutionists, may or may not have their own view on how life originated.

crochet wrote:

And 'creating' is starting from Nothing -- so -- since God was able to Start the process to begin with -- why limit Him -- why give Him thousands of years when He's already shown His power to Begin life in the 1st place. And the book that tells the beginnings Of says He did it in 6 / 24 hr days. Why doubt His Word in the 1st place?

First off, nobody here is limiting God, when we say "millions of years". We look at what the evidence shows, and go from there. Second, nobody is doubting the word, if we disagree with certain interpretations that lead to a YEC belief. Many of us take scripture literally, and still believe the creation week wasn't six 24 hour days.
And others still don't doubt scripture if their belief is theistic evolution. Nobody, not even Yec's have a monopoly on biblical interpretation.

We'd all do ourselves a huge favor if we stopped being so dogmatic on non-essential beliefs.

[Audie]

The thing I've noticed from some creationist sites, including even RTB, is that sometimes there's a false dichotomy presented. And the two choices are that one can believe either, God created (either YEC or OEC), OR purely naturalistic evolution.

If someone believes in an evolutionary view, one does not have to believe in purely naturalistic evolution.

Evolution, whether correct or not, is about life that already existed, changing over time.

How life originated, is not in the scope that evolution addresses.

Tough concepts for some to grasp!

Of course, the false dichotomy is small time stuff ranked against the myriad
falsehoods, distortions, misrepresentations and other dishonesties prattled forth from
your basic "creosite".

What do you suppose is really going on, with these well funded people who are nominally doing the Lord's work?

[Audie]

crochet wrote:
God creating Through evolution. The Problem , as I have understood it -- is that No one can seem to explain the Origin Of.

That's not true. Talk origins believes in evolution, and they explain the origin of life as God.

Other non-theistic evolutionists, may or may not have their own view on how life originated.

crochet wrote:

And 'creating' is starting from Nothing -- so -- since God was able to Start the process to begin with -- why limit Him -- why give Him thousands of years when He's already shown His power to Begin life in the 1st place. And the book that tells the beginnings Of says He did it in 6 / 24 hr days. Why doubt His Word in the 1st place?

First off, nobody here is limiting God, when we say "millions of years". We look at what the evidence shows, and go from there. Second, nobody is doubting the word, if we disagree with certain interpretations that lead to a YEC belief. Many of us take scripture literally, and still believe the creation week wasn't six 24 hour days.
And others still don't doubt scripture if their belief is theistic evolution. Nobody, not even Yec's have a monopoly on biblical interpretation.

We'd all do ourselves a huge favor if we stopped being so dogmatic on non-essential beliefs.

It can lead to dogmatosis, a most serious condition. It can lead also to the most outrageous calumny concerning a god one presents as worshiping.

It is an odd way of "limiting God" with people who insist on "ID" or what I less flatteringly call "God-poof", either for the origin of life with evolution taking over from there, or
the ones who go further, asserting things were created in their present form.

Its quite insulting to suggest that God, if such there be, isnt up to the job
of making a universe from which life with comes forth as spontaneously as rainbows
and stars.

I trifle arrogant, too for the individual who thinks he knows more than all the scientists on earth,
has the capacity for infallible bible readin', and knows better than anything written into the earth

Takes a lot of what one of our lesser lights here referred to as "unshakable faith".
itself.

[crochet1949]

We are talking about God having the power to do what He says. Genesis creation being the start. And the death, burial and bodily resurrection / the virgin birth as two of the More Important aspects of His power.
Scientists have their own personal biases because they are Human Beings. There Are, in fact, scientists who Do believe in creation just the way Genesis states that it happened.
Adam and Eve were not created as babies -- they were old enough to produce children. Animals were able to reproduce, birds already flying. Water life already being alive. Thus, the earth with Appearance of age.
Me ? infallible Bible readin' -- no -- simply Bible reading taken at face value. The evening and the morning being the 1st or 3rd or whatever day you'd like to mention, is a 'day' just like the 'day' we have now.
I'd like to compare That to a baby being a 'day' old when he/she has already been here day. A baby is a week old cause he's already been 'here' a week. No one questions what a 'day' means. And no one questions when a person says they are 53 yrs old. They have been in this world 53 yrs. And a year equals 365 days except for leap year Cause it's an obvious given.

Okay -- so I'm a 'God-poof' er. Yes, He Is powerful enough to create the flying birds 'in flight'. There Are Many kinds of birds, all shapes and sizes and colors. But they did Not 'evolve' /'develop' Into those various kinds. They did Not, over time , due to need / necessity develop larger bills or larger, smaller wings. Because turkeys, chickens Do have wings but they are not used to fly like eagles or robins. So they are Not there for necessity and they are Not left-over parts from 'back when they Did fly'. This country, the United States came to be through immigration from other countries. Not sure what the groups of Indians had to eat / buffalo which are extinct know due to hunting.
But some of the animals we have Now are the result of inbreeding. But a cow is still a cow and a horse still a horse. And I think that a zebra and horses are part of the same Kind of animal. But I question if they Mate.
So, yes, there Are some things that I will be dogmatic about. Being 'politically correct' is getting crazy these days.

[Audie]

[quote="crochet1949"

]We are talking about God having the power to do what He says. Genesis creation being the start. And the death, burial and bodily resurrection / the virgin birth as two of the More Important aspects of His power.

We are ? That is one part of the topic. Of course a god COULD do / have done anything.
"He" did not make the seas out of green pea soup.

Scientists have their own personal biases because they are Human Beings. There Are, in fact, scientists who Do believe in creation just the way Genesis states that it happened.

VERY few of them are scientists who work in biology or geology. NONE can provide so much as one datum point to show that ToE is incorrect.

Any suggestion of balance or equivalence is comleltely invalid.

Adam and Eve were not created as babies -- they were old enough to produce children. Animals were able to reproduce, birds already flying. Water life already being alive. Thus, the earth with Appearance of age.

Just say "embedded age, or, Omphalos" It leads to the most marvellous absurdities.

Me ? infallible Bible readin' -- no -- simply Bible reading taken at face value.

so Jesus is a lamb, baa baa. Simple? Far from it.

So, yes, there Are some things that I will be dogmatic about. Being 'politically correct' is getting crazy these days.

It has zero to do with political correctness, a lot to do with education

I wish you well.


[/quote]

[RickD]

The thing I've noticed from some creationist sites, including even RTB, is that sometimes there's a false dichotomy presented. And the two choices are that one can believe either, God created (either YEC or OEC), OR purely naturalistic evolution.

If someone believes in an evolutionary view, one does not have to believe in purely naturalistic evolution.

Evolution, whether correct or not, is about life that already existed, changing over time.

How life originated, is not in the scope that evolution addresses.

Tough concepts for some to grasp!

Of course, the false dichotomy is small time stuff ranked against the myriad
falsehoods, distortions, misrepresentations and other dishonesties prattled forth from
your basic "creosite".

What do you suppose is really going on, with these well funded people who are nominally doing the Lord's work?

Audie,

Of course, as with anything else, there's a chance that some of these people will hold onto their beliefs come hell or high water, because they are getting rich off of their beliefs. Others just honestly believe that their beliefs are true.

With me, I believed the false dichotomy I spoke of above. I took someone else's word, who I trusted, and thought was more knowledgeable on the subject. I really hadn't studied it for myself.

But I was open to change, if I thought the evidence lead to changing what I believed.

But that's just me.

[RickD]

Crochet,

Two things...

First, the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, isn't affected whatsoever, by one's creation beliefs.

One can believe YEC, OEC, TE, etc. and still be a believer in Christ. It's a non-essential issue.

Second, you might want to rethink believing the appearance of age argument. YECs gave that up about the same time they abandoned the water canopy theory. Appearance of age makes God out to be a deceiver. If God gave us the desire and ability to see how old His creation is, then He just makes it look old, despite its actual age, then that's a god who is tricking us.

[abelcainsbrother]

God creating Through evolution. The Problem , as I have understood it -- is that No one can seem to explain the Origin Of.

And 'creating' is starting from Nothing -- so -- since God was able to Start the process to begin with -- why limit Him -- why give Him thousands of years when He's already shown His power to Begin life in the 1st place. And the book that tells the beginnings Of says He did it in 6 / 24 hr days. Why doubt His Word in the 1st place?

The thing about evolution is that it really does'nt deal with origins,it only deals with trying to show life evolved after it was here.The problem is no biologist or scientists has any evidence that demonstrates life evolves and the evidence they use for evidence does not demonstrate life evolves,this is the problem I have with evolution. And it amazes me how so many people have accepted it with so little evidence. I mean it seems like a mountain of evidence behind evolution but I'm talking about the evidence they use to show life evolves. For those who have accepted evolution they are choosing to believe scientists and professors explain how life evolves and are not focusing on the evidence that does not demonstrate what they explain.


Also about creationism it is important to understand the difference between the words "created" and "made" when you read Genesis and the OT.Alot of Christians just assume "created" and "made" mean the samething when they read it and it causes them to get the wrong interpretation.I know this because for years I did it too,until I learned the truth.

The bible does not tell us God created it in 6/24 hr days,the bible tells us God made it in 6/24 hr days and it tells us this in several different places too. Also the bible does not tell us specifically how old the earth is like you imply but it does tell us the earth is old. So when you know the bible tells us the earth is old why would you reject evidence in the earth,etc that confirms it is old? The bible tells us the earth is old even if you don't know about the hebrew word "yom",it already tells us the heavens and earth is old and we have evidence that confirms it.

I'll give you an example of some evidence that confirms the earth is old. If you accept young earth creationism then that means it was about 1500 years from God creating Adam and Eve to Noah's flood but when we examine the evidence in the earth we have massive amounts of death and exctinction in the earth,there is more life dead and exctinct in the earth than life on the earth now so that there is no way you could make this much death and exctinction in the earth fit into a 1500 year period. There is no way,and God is not decieving us or anything but young earth creationists will cling to their interpretation,hold up the bible and ignore the evidence in the earth that goes against the young earth interpretation.

Also it was mostly Christian scientists who started modern science that discovered this evidence in the earth and this was before evolution became a scientific theory too. Once evolution became a scientific theory though all of this evidence was hyjcked away and made to fit into the theory of evolution. And since then the age of the earth has been extended out to billions of years old for the sake of evolution,to allow enough time for life to evolve. This is why I prefer to go back before evolution became a scientific theory to believe the earth is millions of years old and not billions. But the bottom line is according to the evidence the earth is atleast millions of years old.

But also our God is eternal so what was God doing before just 6000 years ago?As Jay Vernon McGee used to say "No my friend,he's been busy."

[crochet1949]

RickD -- It Can be affected Because -- Since God has been shown to be powerful enough to raise a person from the dead. Isn't He Also powerful enough to create the earth ready to Be just the way it's needed to sustain Life and have it prosper in the Now?
See what I'm trying to say? God didn't Need any developing or evolving to take place 'first'.
And there are still Young Earth People around -- lots of us.

[crochet1949]

ACB -- you're right evolution doesn't deal with the actual Beginning of life. Simply because no one really Knows unless a person believes that God created it.
And - God made man and Eve out of the material He had previously Created.
And good intelligent people were Determined that the earth was Flat until it was proven that it was Indeed round.
Some of the scientific world have acknowledged that the fossil remains that have been used to 'prove' evolution actually Do 'prove' the results of a massive flood having taken place.
Passages Do say that He spoke it into existence.
I happen to Like a good discussion.

Maybe it's 'young' in comparison to being million or billions of years. The 'experts' have to allow millions / billions in order to give those mutations time to accumulate and have something 'new' come into existence. Which we know isn't possible because either a heart is complete and working or it isn't. A three-chamber heart can't 'gradually' become a 4-chamber heart.

[RickD]

RickD -- It Can be affected Because -- Since God has been shown to be powerful enough to raise a person from the dead. Isn't He Also powerful enough to create the earth ready to Be just the way it's needed to sustain Life and have it prosper in the Now?
See what I'm trying to say? God didn't Need any developing or evolving to take place 'first'.
And there are still Young Earth People around -- lots of us.

Crochet,

Nobody is saying God needed billions of years to create the universe, and everything up to the point in time we are now.

But the evidence shows the universe is billions of years old.

You do realize that to a God who is eternal, a God who is outside of time, 13.8 billion years or 1 week, or one nanosecond is meaningless? What percent of eternity is a nanosecond? 13.8 billion years?

God is powerful enough to create anything He chooses, in an instant. He doesn't need 6 days. Are you saying that God is weak because He needed to take 6 days to create?

[abelcainsbrother]

ACB -- you're right evolution doesn't deal with the actual Beginning of life. Simply because no one really Knows unless a person believes that God created it.
And - God made man and Eve out of the material He had previously Created.
And good intelligent people were Determined that the earth was Flat until it was proven that it was Indeed round.
Some of the scientific world have acknowledged that the fossil remains that have been used to 'prove' evolution actually Do 'prove' the results of a massive flood having taken place.
Passages Do say that He spoke it into existence.
I happen to Like a good discussion.

Maybe it's 'young' in comparison to being million or billions of years. The 'experts' have to allow millions / billions in order to give those mutations time to accumulate and have something 'new' come into existence. Which we know isn't possible because either a heart is complete and working or it isn't. A three-chamber heart can't 'gradually' become a 4-chamber heart.

Yes it is true some used to think the earth was flat and it came from a flawed biblical interpretation too,it was the interpretation that was wrong.So you need to realize that the young earth interpretation could be wrong. However it is a myth that most Christians believed the earth was flat and it did not originate with Christians either,it was two story-tellers who were not Christians who started this flat earth non-sense.But there were a certian amount of Christians who tried to make it fit into the bible eventhough it was wrong. The ancient greeks knew the earth was round long,long before this flat-earth non-sense started.

It is like today with bible prophecy so many times people get out ahead of what bible prophecy says is going to happen and they make certian news events fit into their flawed interpretation of bible prophecy and end up being wrong because they ignored other prophecies that must be fulfilled.

[Audie]

The thing I've noticed from some creationist sites, including even RTB, is that sometimes there's a false dichotomy presented. And the two choices are that one can believe either, God created (either YEC or OEC), OR purely naturalistic evolution.

If someone believes in an evolutionary view, one does not have to believe in purely naturalistic evolution.

Evolution, whether correct or not, is about life that already existed, changing over time.

How life originated, is not in the scope that evolution addresses.

Tough concepts for some to grasp!

Of course, the false dichotomy is small time stuff ranked against the myriad
falsehoods, distortions, misrepresentations and other dishonesties prattled forth from
your basic "creosite".

What do you suppose is really going on, with these well funded people who are nominally doing the Lord's work?

Audie,

Of course, as with anything else, there's a chance that some of these people will hold onto their beliefs come hell or high water, because they are getting rich off of their beliefs. Others just honestly believe that their beliefs are true.

With me, I believed the false dichotomy I spoke of above. I took someone else's word, who I trusted, and thought was more knowledgeable on the subject. I really hadn't studied it for myself.

But I was open to change, if I thought the evidence lead to changing what I believed.

But that's just me.

Not just you. A lot of people can change whilr others kinda fossilize at some point.

Here we behold two creationists who literally know less than nothing about
evolution or deep time telling eachother that their data-free assertions are correct.

I have an uncle who is still a Mao/ cultural revolution guy.

If we got two like him together for mutual support, I suppose the conversations, 2 talking creationism or 2 for Maoism would for all their differences still be eerily similar.

[crackpot]

I have an uncle still stuck in Mao's cultural revolutioHe is as open to evidence and change as any creationist.

I see. Think skulls, intransigence and stubbornness run in your family it seems.

Interesting.

[RickD]

The thing I've noticed from some creationist sites, including even RTB, is that sometimes there's a false dichotomy presented. And the two choices are that one can believe either, God created (either YEC or OEC), OR purely naturalistic evolution.

If someone believes in an evolutionary view, one does not have to believe in purely naturalistic evolution.

Evolution, whether correct or not, is about life that already existed, changing over time.

How life originated, is not in the scope that evolution addresses.

Tough concepts for some to grasp!

Of course, the false dichotomy is small time stuff ranked against the myriad
falsehoods, distortions, misrepresentations and other dishonesties prattled forth from
your basic "creosite".

What do you suppose is really going on, with these well funded people who are nominally doing the Lord's work?

Audie,

Of course, as with anything else, there's a chance that some of these people will hold onto their beliefs come hell or high water, because they are getting rich off of their beliefs. Others just honestly believe that their beliefs are true.

With me, I believed the false dichotomy I spoke of above. I took someone else's word, who I trusted, and thought was more knowledgeable on the subject. I really hadn't studied it for myself.

But I was open to change, if I thought the evidence lead to changing what I believed.

But that's just me.

I have an uncle still stuck in Mao's cultural revolutio
He is as open to evidence and change as any creationist.

I was what you'd call a "creationist", and I was open to evidence and change.(Not to be confused with being open to Obama's Hope and Change.