#78617 - 04/13/06 05:41 AM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: Billy Dennis]
|
Husband and Father
Registered: 09/05/04
Posts: 7070
Loc: Brisbane, Australia
|
In terms of the 'age measurement of a new earth', the radioactive dating is pretty easy to explain: God could make the planet have the radioisotope balance of an old planet. But it's in the geological column and the fossils where that argument gets tricky. Making the rocks with a certain chemical makeup that suggests a certain age is one thing, but actively burying a complete set of fossils that very strongly and coherently suggested change and progression from simple to complex organisms over long periods of time... I dunno, that's one I'd definitely want to ask Him about...
_________________________
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78619 - 04/13/06 06:38 AM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: ]
|
Registered: 09/27/04
Posts: 1241
Loc: CA
|
Quote:
Nicodema said:
I conveniently avoid the debate altogether by invoking Hebrews 11:3.
"By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible." To me this says it all.
(1) That understanding fiat ex nihilo creation by the word of God is a matter of faith (not science).
(2) That what we see today was NOT made of the stuff we see today (and therefore, the mechanisms of creation cannot be discerned by the scientific method).
(3) Deduction: whatever the scientific method discovers, therefore, may indeed be applicable insofar as understanding the stuff we can see today and how it works and by what laws it operates -- but it cannot discover the mechanism of its creation or how it got here or how it got that way.
If people ask me am I a creationist or evolutionist, etc. I tell them I am a Hebrews 11:3-ist.
I like this! I don't have anything to say, except to repost it.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78620 - 04/13/06 01:03 PM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: Billy Dennis]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Quote:
actively burying a complete set of fossils that very strongly and coherently suggested change and progression from simple to complex organisms over long periods of time... I dunno, that's one I'd definitely want to ask Him about...
That is the major stalling point for me also, but then there is also the secondary but just as scientifically supported
and why does the scientific evidence contradict the Biblical story of a world-wide life-destroying flood in 4000BC
The "God could have made it look old" argument and the 'the mechanism can't be examined by science" argument both shows that person making it is beginning to see there is a huge problem, but they are reluctant to abandon their current belief in Genesis.
I can understand that - it took me 20 years to go from being a short-age-creationist believing that the various Creation Science organisations were honest, to a long-age-evolutionist realizing that the SDA church and the Creation Science organisations were doing a mixture of failing to do real science and actively lying to me.
But the three issues of
(a) Why are fossils the way they are, and
(b) Why is there no solid support for the flood, and
(c) How can we fit the 150,000 years of solid archaeological data into a 6,000 year old earth
finally convinced me that we need better answers than a literal reading of a myth.
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78621 - 04/13/06 03:48 PM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: Mandy]
|
Administrator of Foro Adventista
Registered: 02/02/02
Posts: 16950
Loc: Rio Grande Valley, Texas
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78622 - 04/13/06 04:21 PM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: mausman]
|
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 4699
Loc: New England
|
Sigh.
You actually need to STUDY the mountain, and then you discover that you are looking at
(a) huge folds with major erosion - and you discover that the only way to fold rock like that without shattering it is to use huge pressures and temperatures
(b) huge breaks and sideways movements and other patterns that show plate tectonics and other massive activities
(c) that the species and dates indicate huge ages
You are going into this with a 'anything that might hint at creationism is obviously evidence for creationism' attitude. You need to go in with a much more critical 'what are the facts and how does my model explain them all' attitude.
Science: Detailed research aimed at "why is my theory wrong"
Creationism: Hasty search for any evidence, however sketchy, that hints a preconceived belief is right
Jones is right. Creationism is doing more damage to sensible religion than it is to science. People who understand the issues are really turned off religion by creationists.
/Bevin
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78623 - 04/13/06 04:32 PM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: Mandy]
|
Carpe Diem!!!
Registered: 09/15/06
Posts: 3919
Loc: 49.05° Lat- 122.3° Long
|
'The word evolution has done more harm to social sciences than any other word' my atheistical Anthropology professor in a public University, who went on to say "never let that thought enter your head when you are doing research' "Those people clearly have not evolved as fast as we have there therefor we can have dominion over them and help speed them up so they can think more like a WASP" paraphrased thoughts from the socio-evolutionary thinkers. "THOSE people are clearly not as developed as we are. MY OWN THOUGHTS Generally this is not a battle over creation/evolution it is a battle of is there a God or not. Someone show me a sales slip dated either after 4000 BC or before that. 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78624 - 04/13/06 06:12 PM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: Halfstep Denise]
|
Husband and Father
Registered: 09/05/04
Posts: 7070
Loc: Brisbane, Australia
|
But no, it's *not* a battle over whether there is a God or not, since theistic evolution posits an existing, and even miraculously acting, God, as does ancient creationism. It's a battle over whether the Bible should be read literally (even where such a reading does violence to the intention of the writer) or not. That's a completely different battle!
See the new 'Some Discussions About Interpretation' thread.
Edited by Bravus (04/13/06 06:14 PM)
_________________________
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#78625 - 04/13/06 07:04 PM
Re: Why Creationism Is Wrong and Evolution is Right
[Re: Billy Dennis]
|
Registered: 11/22/03
Posts: 777
Loc: Beyond your grasp
|
Bravus, for some, whether the Bible should be taken literally IS a battle over whether there is really a God or not. Because once we start poking holes in Scripture, let's face it, the door is open for all kinds of spurious things to come in and go out upon the same grounds that SINCERE people are LEGITIMATELY discussing such things as the nature of inspiration, the place of Scripture in a relationship with Christ, etc. etc.
That's a major hurdle for a lot of folks, where to draw the line so that education and development of understanding can take place but the spurious and the deceptive can have the "gates" firmly shut in their faces, so to speak.
_________________________
"After such knowledge, what forgiveness?" -- T.S. Eliot
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
SEARCH OUR SITE
|
|
This full membership income helps pay for hosting, advertising, domain names, software support etc etc
|
|
|
62 registered (aldona, Beryl, Bravus, bygjymbo, c freeland, carolaa, CoAspen, Coulsty, Curly, darlene, dgrimm60, Dottie, Doug, fca, fccool, forgie, Gerry Cabalo, Gladussee, Heather Cummings, iramos, Jerry D Thomas, John317, Kevin H, Kountzer, lazarus, LifeHiscost, Lineman, Liz, Loren Fenton, LynnDel, max, Maxi, melvin mccarty, mikeyswen79, Nan, Neil D, Nightingale, Norman, olger, pkrause, Planey, Redwood, Robert, Sapphire, SMAN, Taylor, 16 invisible),
382
Guests and
233
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 399
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
