Creation V Evolution Debate

Quote Robin
JC, Danno -

Just out of interest, are you both flat-earthers too?

- robin.

ps: I'm still waiting for an explanation of the contradiction in Genesis

The (spherical) shape of the Earth is repeatably observable and it is therefore scientifically verifiable and beyond doubt.
In fact Is 40:22 confirms that the Earth is circular – “He sits enthroned above the CIRCLE of the Earth, and its people are like grasshoppers.” (NIV).
'Flat Earth' ideas were held to be true by some Ancient Peoples but this was never believed-in by ‘The People of God.’


I thought that I had already ANSWERED you Genesis question satisfactorily. Does the fact that Genesis 1 is in ‘chronological order’ and Genesis 2 is in ‘subject order’ not explain your perceived contradiction?
If not, please tell me once again where the contradiction is in Genesis and I will try to resolve your problem for you.

PS I am still waiting for ANY ANSWERS to my questions on Evolution – and I have answered all of the questions asked of me.


Quote Phil 321
You have no proof that 'God' exists. How can you argue against people who don't pay any regard to concepts such facts and proof.

The creation of the Universe and God himself are not repeatably observable. However, strong circumstantial evidence does exist for both God and Creation – and strong circumstantial evidence IS acceptable in a Court of Law where it has a STATUS OF PROOF approaching scientific and eyewitness evidence.

In any event, here are some of the basic Circumstantial Proofs for the existence of God :-

The fact that all ‘effects’ are observed to have an equivalent ‘cause’ means that the ‘biggest effect of all’ (the creation of all matter, time and space) must also have an equally big ‘cause’ and only God is capable of being this ‘Ultimate Cause’.
The fact that all processes in the Universe work like clockwork, means that there is a ‘clockmaker’ out there somewhere – and He is God.
The fact that all energy in the Universe is ‘winding down’ means that some all-powerful ‘entity’ must have ‘wound it up’ – again the only possible solution is an all-powerful God.
The fact that life shows massive amounts of purposeful information, proves that a massive intelligence aka God created it.
The fact that no increase in genetic information has ever been observed in living organisms indicates that all of life was created with the same or more genetic information than it now possesses and only God could do that.
The fact that life has never been observed to arise spontaneously means that it must have been created and the only plausible ‘Creator’ is God.

Quote Phil 321
No logical person ultimately knows how the universe was created, but they subscribe to the theory of Evolution on how the universe developed.

I am glad that you have confirmed the fact that SCIENCE DOESN’T KNOW HOW THE UNIVERSE WAS CREATED – please bear this in mind when you next read about the so-called “Big Bang” or is it now called the “Big Crunch” – or whatever!!!

Science also doesn’t know how life originated either.

Quote Phil 321
if there was some all powerful (and unproveable) 'God' why didn't create it all in one day?

The all powerful ever living God could have created everything in one nanosecond, never mind one day – if He chose to do so.
However, because God created the Universe especially for Man’s benefit, he chose a timescale of importance to man – namely the working week. God knew that man would work ‘24 / 7’ without a break – and that is why He chose to create the Universe and everything therein in 6 days – and rested on the seventh day.
It also confirmed in Ex 20:11 that the creation week is the basis of the Fourth Commandment “for in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy”(NIV).


Quote Robin
Finally, I came across this one recently, which just about sums up creationism from the point of view of suitably-trained scientists:

] "Geology shows that fossils are of different ages. Paleontology
] shows a fossil sequence, the list of species represented changes
] through time. Taxonomy shows biological relationships among
] species. Evolution is the explanation that threads it all together.
] Creationism is the practice of squeezing one's eyes shut and
] wailing 'does not!'"

Creation Scientists have proved (using repeatably observable phenomena) that none of the above statements are valid!!!

Geology shows that all fossils are less than c. 7,000 years old with the vast majority of fossils dating from Noah’s Flood 5,000 +/- 500 years ago. The assumption that the millions of so-called “annual micro layers” observed in deep sedimentary rock layers such as the Grand Canyon represented millions of years of sedimentary deposition was disproven during the Mount St Helens eruption in 1980 when hundreds of thousands of “micro layers” were observed to be laid down in newly formed sedimentary rocks in a matter of hours.
Equally, polystrate tree fossils are observed ‘standing up through’ sedimentary rock layers that supposedly took millions of years to lay down – the logical conclusion is that that these layers were laid down rapidly and not over millions of years. It is ridiculous to postulate that a dead tree stood upright for millions of years while slow deposition of sediment gradually buried it. The fact that the ‘bottom’ of the fossilised tree is observed to be as well preserved as the ‘top’ is also a bit of a ‘giveaway’ that very rapid burial took place. Deep sedimentary rock layers therefore do not indicate ‘long ages’ – only a catastrophic worldwide disaster!!!!

Palaeontology shows the sequence in which creatures were killed and buried during Noah’s Flood – seafloor dwelling creatures and flocculated plankton first – all the way up to large land animals and birds, that obviously would be last to ‘succumb to the waves’. The extraction of red blood cells and haemoglobin from (unfossilized) dinosaur bone and the extraction of DNA fragments from insects trapped in supposedly multiple million year old amber indicates that these creatures were alive very recently indeed. If these bones / insects were, in fact, millions of years old, all biological material in them would have completely degenerated by now. The observed rates of biological degeneration under such conditions would give maximal ages of a few thousand years for these bones / insects.
The list of species in the so-called Geological Column represents the order of their catastrophic burial and it is NOT a record of their supposed evolution.

Taxonomy shows the CURRENT biological relationships among species that have arisen through speciation processes acting on the original created Kinds.
Evolution explains the scientifically valid phenomenon of Natural Selection, and this isn’t contested by Creation Scientists.

Creation Science observes the world with “open eyes and an open mind”.

The lack of plausible mechanisms postulated by Evolution and the mathematical impossibility of undirected processes producing life, means that Evolutionists have serious questions to answer on these issues - and so far no answers have been offered on this thread.


Quote Zod
I think there are minimum numbers that a species needs to survive ? The gene pool for this is shallow. Or do you disagree with genetisists also?

Are you saying that adam and eves sons and daughters all interbred ?


The gene pool becomes shallow when breeding proceeds in a narrow direction for a number of generations. To take an example, a pedigree animal e.g a Poodle has a very restricted gene pool due to significant selection pressure and inbreeding down the generations. A Poodle crossed with another Poodle will almost invariably produce nothing but Poodles. However, a mongrel dog will usually have a very deep gene pool – and crossing two mongrels will produce an enormous variety of dogs of all shapes and sizes (all of them with hybrid vigour as well, I might also add).
It is therefore entirely possible to have enormous genetic diversity within only two animals of the same species.
I think your point was derived from the fact that remnant populations of inbred animals on the verge of extinction often have very shallow gene pools and significant numbers of such animals are required to have a viable breeding programme to preserve such a threatened species.
However, this problem does not apply to outbred animals with significant inherent genetic diversity.


Yes, Adam and Eve’s children married each other.
This was OK because:-
1. They didn’t have any choice in the matter as they had nobody else to marry, and indeed it was sanctioned by God who told Adam and Eve (and by extension their children) in Gen 1:28 to “Be fruitful and increase in number”(NIV).
2. There was little / no genetic defects in the earlier generations of mankind (because they had been created perfect by God). Therefore, the children born of unions between close relatives did not run any danger of being homozygous for serious genetic disorders (which is one of the reasons for banning marriage among close adult relatives).
Genetic disorders largely arose after Noah’s Flood when the mutation rates appear to have significantly increased – and a Law was then given by God in Lev 20:17 that siblings shouldn’t marry.
Of course, first cousins have always been able to marry – so there was no great difficulty for children in the immediate subsequent generations from Adam and Eve finding suitable marriage partners.

Quote Solas
This is what it says in the bible.

"The bible is the word of God...but even if you had bought this book and read it with much attention, you cannot force God to hand over his message to you. God himself will introduce you to the truth if you can meet certain requirements. The first one is to search with perseverance, the door will be opened to those who knock. Do not give up if you cannot understand at the beginning, but ask in prayer and you will recieve enlightenment. Another requirement is that you search it together with your brothers and sisters as you participate in a christian community."

even in that small paragraph I'm sure there are certain phrases that are alien to you robin,

I can’t speak for Robin, but speaking as a Christian, the whole paragraph above is ALIEN to me!!!
The above paragraph appears nowhere in the 66 books of the Bible.

The only requirement that God specifies for Christians is outlined in the SIMPLE prescription in Acts 16:31 “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved – you and your household” (NIV). There is no Biblical requirement to ‘ask in prayer’ in order to understand what the infallible Word of God in the Bible is saying – it is always very clear – to Christians indwelt with the Holy Spirit of God at any rate.


Quotes Solas
On another topic, I am intrigued to know which form of christianity does J.C and Danno follow and who exactly taught them their understanding of the bible.

I'm as intrigued as you are as to where J.C and Danno have derived their understandings.

Be intrigued no longer!!!
My faith-based opinions are derived from the infallible Word of God in the Bible.
My science-based opinions are grounded on repeatably observable reality.

I BELIEVE that:-

1. There is only ONE saving FAITH in Jesus Christ.
2. There is only ONE mediator between God and man – Jesus Christ.
3. EVERY word of the Bible is God breathed and true.
4. We shall all give an account of OURSELVES to God – and if we plead at The Judgement that “somebody else told us what to do” this will have as much validity as Adam’s famous attempt at 'blame transfer' to Eve in Gen 3:12 – which is no validity.


Quote Zod
if ET life is undeniably found ( not just some sensor readout - but actual samples ) then surely this would ridicule all this literal Bible creationist interpretation. I am saying its the smoking gun and your answer on behalf of Creationism cannot be ambiguous

My position as a scientist is that anything is POSSIBLE – I have told you that Creation Scientists have open minds – but they require repeatably observable evidence.
My position as a Christian is that the Bible is silent on ET life – and I personally don’t BELIEVE that ET life exists.
To answer your hypothetical question – in the unlikely event that ET life is scientifically proven to exist – then Creation Scientists would obviously accept it’s existence.

However, I don’t think that it would be a ‘smoking gun’ in the sense of having any significant impact on the validity of Creation.
It would certainly not be equivalent to the fatal blow delivered to Evolution by Sir Fred Hoyle’s discovery of the mathematical impossibility of producing life via un-directed processes.
Indeed, the size of Sir Fred Hoyle’s figures prove that it is also impossible to produce ET life by un-directed processes, using all of the matter in the Universe and an effective infinity of time.


Quote Zod
why would the Bible have ommited such a profoundly important fact (the possible existence of ET life).

It probably is because ET life doesn’t exist.
However, I don’t believe that ET life would be a profoundly important fact (if it did exist). I would feel no differently if knew that God created ET life than I do about his creation of other species here on Earth.

Quote Solas
in response to J.C’s biblical reference to Timothy 11 – 3:14
contd..tim 11-3:16
”All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, refuting error, for correcting and training.”
I would just have my doubts sometimes as to the qualifications of the teachers, I would personally like to think my teachers have studied the subject in depth, are qualified and sufficiently experienced in its understanding before they start teaching others, less room for err that way.

My teacher is Jesus Christ and His Word – and I have no doubts about His qualifications.

Please note that St. Paul himself didn’t have ANY formal theological qualifications – and it is quite clear from this passage of Holy Scripture that ANY Christian can use the word of God for teaching, refuting error, correcting, etc.

Quote Wicknight
If there was a message saying "I am God, and I am very clever" encoded in the amoeba's DNA code then that would be evidence of intelligent design.
The odds of un-directed processes producing the amino acid sequences for the proteins in an Amoeba is 10 ^ - 40,000 which is a number greater that the number of seconds required for a snail to transport all of the matter in the Universe from one side of the Universe to the other taking one electron at a time!!!!

I think that THIS IS certainly a message saying “I am God and I am very clever” - although I don't think that God would have said it that way.

Rom 1:19-20 confirms what he actually said on this issue ”Since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God made it plain to them. For since the CREATION of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, BEING UNDERSTOOD FROM WHAT HAS BEEN MADE, so that men are without excuse.” (NIV).