I'm Wishful's Friend

[Guest Marks]

I guys, I'm new and I'v been with wishful for almost every post she made and she as also showed me how to post and and quote. BUT I am what my son calls me a Noobie... LOL anyway Instead of jumping into wishfuls topics, I'm going to start my own. I do know where I am, but I like to think we are all the same no matter what this website is called. I'm not really trying to convert you back but I do like to try have good agruments. mabye we all can learn something new. My views are little bit differnt then wishful and her husban. That being said ......

 

I've been messing around with Google and creation and Bible topics, I've been finding a lot of statements that have come out of Yale, Princeton and Harverd where astronomers and geologists pretty strongly support the Genesis account of Creation and the Bible. There have been professors at Princeton University that spent most of their lives researching the Bible to find out if it was genuine and authentic and ended up standing completely by the Bible.

 

I guess in Antlerman's extended and indepth research he either chose to ignore these professors with Ph. D.'s, or he just didn't research nearly enough, or (and this is the explanation which is probably most likely,) he didn't like what they had to say.

 

I realize this doesn't prove anything, but what it does tell me is that there are plenty of people who have studied and taught astronomy and geology with PH. D's., that believe in the Bible. Before we moved to Ohio 11 years ago, I had a good friend in Pa. who was a biology teacher and he did indeed support Creationism as well as professed a personal faith in Christ. No matter how stupid Antlerman tried to make some of us feel, I'll hold onto my faith in Christ and the Bible over some woman who hides behind a screen name and a computer.

 

There are some that may consider my last sentence to lack love and patience, but there were times when Christ called out the so called scholars of that day, too.

 

"Do not deceive yourselves. If anyone of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a 'fool' so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written, 'He catches the wise in their craftiness' and again, 'The Lord knows the the thoughts of the wise are futile." (1 Corinthians 3:18-20)

 

This verse is not suggesting anything against an education and knowledge. It is suggesting that those who think they become so wise and educated in their own eyes and deny the truth of the Gospel are completely deceived and blind.

 

PS I will do my best to try to answer every one's post but I'm sorry if I don't. From what I seen from wishful.... she choose to stick to one person b/c it was hard for her to answer all others.... it just became to over whelming.

[Guest Marks]

Here's a good article on the missing link. It also addresses what you guys said about fossils. You guys seem totally convinced otherwise, so I feel this might be futile? The article also addresses how evolution has brainwashed people.

You can believe you're from a monkey if you wish! I was created higher right off the bat. It was no accident.

Where did life come from? Nothing?? What did the first organism eat? Why are monkeys still around, and not evolved? There's just too many holes in evolution left unanswered.

When you say I am from a monkey it takes the book of Genesis and throws it in the trash. It's my belief system that Genesis is a fact...not evolution!

 

 

http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:...ient=firefox-a

[Ramen666]

First off and foremost I want to know why you and wishful are only responding to Antlerman. We have made lots of posts and yet you two seem to "overlook" them. I will respond to your post when you start responding to THE REST OF THE USERS.

 

since you are link happy, here is a link

 

www.evilbible.com it is on what your Bible endorses and has in it, I guarantee did not know the Bible is filled with SO MUCH hate.

[Ouroboros]

Mark, what do you mean that you were created "higher of the bat"?

 

Consider this, if you exclude the question about a soul or a spirit, and the whole debate if we have one or not, what do you exist of? From what I understand, unless you can prove otherwise, we consist of DNA, cells, etc and particles, atoms and quarks exactly the same was as the animals. We don't have a different kind of DNA, or a different way of reproducing. When you are created, i.e. when you are born, you consist of matter from this world, and it's compiled and constructed exactly the same way as the apes. Now, how can you claim that you somehow is different when it comes to biology, since there is nothing there that is different in process or content (besides the question of the soul). Can you provide a good answer for this? What is the major biological difference between us and animals?

 

Since you have found many websites and arguments to support Genesis, I wonder do you have found any astronomer that can prove that Earth actually had only one day and one day per 24 hours? Have you ever thought about the problem with a spherical planet where you have mornings and evenings every minute of the day. You have to admit that the Bible is not talking about a literal morning and a literal night, unless you think that God had a body and stood on the shores of Palestine and the morning and day was referencing to that particular spot.

 

About the age of the universe, supernova 1987A proves, to me, without any doubt, that our world is at least, but not limited to, 150,000 years. How does "scientists" make that agreeable with Genesis?

 

And my last question: why do humans and chimpanzees share a whole bunch of exact same ERV changes to their DNA? ERV modifications to the DNA is only shared through ancestry, and if we're created, then why did God intentionally put the exact same ERV C-vitamin-gene deficiency as the chimpanzees?

 

Mark, the Creation story is a fictional tale and is supposed to be read as an allegory. Even Jews at the time of Jesus knew this and debated this. And yet here we are 2000 years later, and no much wiser, and the same debate is going on.

 

Now, what evidence do you say you had that scientists supports a Creation story?

 

And I too knew Ph.D scientists who were Christians, but they kept quiet in the Church about what they really thought about Genesis, and the ones I talked too, 1-on-1, said they did NOT read the story literally, but just as a generic description of God's creation. After all, chapter 1 and chapter 2 tells two different stories, and even you have to say that either the first or the second is NOT literal to make it work. And think about this: if you think that your belief is supported because some believers have PhD etc, then why do you think that our view is wrong if there are other people with our view that also have PhDs? Shouldn't it go both ways? We are right because the support of smart people, and you're view is right because of the support of smart people, and maybe the real answer is that you are just reading the Bible wrong!! With the right interpretation you might get the puzzle together where both views work. If you believe in scientists who support your view, why don't you believe scientists that does not support your view?

[Grandpa Harley]

here we go again... someone else on the 'great commission'...

 

 

I'll field this one

 

"Why are monkeys still around, and not evolved?"

 

They are... they're the highest evolved monkeys there are... when a on organism no longer has the evironmental stressors to adapt to it's environment, you get noise mutations, minor changes in colour, trivial morphology. For instance, the crocodillian lizards have survived 120 million years *virtually* unchanged... only major changes over the period have been in size, other gross anatomy remains unchanged simply because they're successful in their current niche.

 

The tailed primates (monkeys) are still successful insofar as breeding and finding food, thus adaption (which is high enenrgy past time, due to high losses) is minor. If there were sufficient monkey generations under environmental stress you'd begin to see major behavioural and morphological changes We see 'new' behaviours' in stressed primate and other populations... tool making chimpanzees being a case in point. As they lose environmental space, the weapon bearing chimps have an advantage, then the minor morphological changes that support tool use and weapon wielding will begin to reinforce. Similar patterns have been seen in diverse species in the fossil record. Example, a specific type of worm... it appears virtually unchanged in the fossil record for something like 500 million years... thence it begins to changes, rapidly (100-200 thousand years into various morphologically baroque forms (it's one of those pesky 'transitional' species that people claim don't exist) into about 150 distinct forms... and then it vanishes. It doesn't find a niche, it 'tries' various solutions, and fails to find a good one... the last versions of the worm were developing what appear to be legs... but it failed. It's the same with most speciation obeserved in the geological record... 'long' periods of staibility, then 'rapid' adaption into speciation (dwarf mammoths being a good one of those... something like 300 mammoth generations to go from megalodon type mammoths to something the size of a shetland pony)

 

The question means you have virtually no idea what you're talking about... and I'm probably pissing electrons up the wall typing the foregoing...

[Japedo]

Here's a good article on the missing link. It also addresses what you guys said about fossils. You guys seem totally convinced otherwise, so I feel this might be futile? The article also addresses how evolution has brainwashed people.

You can believe you're from a monkey if you wish! I was created higher right off the bat. It was no accident.

Where did life come from? Nothing?? What did the first organism eat? Why are monkeys still around, and not evolved? There's just too many holes in evolution left unanswered.

When you say I am from a monkey it takes the book of Genesis and throws it in the trash. It's my belief system that Genesis is a fact...not evolution!

 

Is it also your belief that the sun revolves around the earth? That the earth is the center of the universe? That the earth is Flat? The moon gives off light? If you don't hold these views then you also disagree with the buybull.

 

 

If god always existed why can't the same be true of the universe? I don't claim we evolved from monkeys, I know that's a theory of where we 'might' have come from, It also has a lot more science behind it then the theory we were created out of a lump of dirt and some guys rib.

 

People evolve everyday. An egg and sperm becomes a zygote who evolves into a baby whom evolves into an adult. Applying that on a grander scale why couldn't the human race change over the course of millennia? People live longer and are taller then in the past as an average, ask yourself why that is?

[Grandpa Harley]

BTW, what the hell is the Christian Troll boy trying to link to...

[mwc]

Well, first of all, welcome. I'm not quite sure of the person(s) you are referring to but I'm sure if they've been around for any length if time we've crossed paths on at least one occasion.

 

I've been messing around with Google and creation and Bible topics, I've been finding a lot of statements that have come out of Yale, Princeton and Harverd where astronomers and geologists pretty strongly support the Genesis account of Creation and the Bible. There have been professors at Princeton University that spent most of their lives researching the Bible to find out if it was genuine and authentic and ended up standing completely by the Bible.

You're quite right. People from all backrounds believe in creation. They tend to exist in the minority as they climb up the ladder of acedemia but that doesn't mean they don't exist at all. I'm not familiar with the argument that claims they don't exist at all...especially in the schools you mention.

 

I guess in Antlerman's extended and indepth research he either chose to ignore these professors with Ph. D.'s, or he just didn't research nearly enough, or (and this is the explanation which is probably most likely,) he didn't like what they had to say.

I can't speak for Antlerman but in many discussions the appeal to authority only holds so much weight. The overwhelming view in both astronomy and geology is evolution so an appeal to authority should make that the defacto "truth" by this way of thinking. So you're just as guilty for discounting an appeal to authority as anyone else might be. The only difference is the creationist has only the bible and little, if anything, else to back their authority's view point.

 

I realize this doesn't prove anything, but what it does tell me is that there are plenty of people who have studied and taught astronomy and geology with PH. D's., that believe in the Bible. Before we moved to Ohio 11 years ago, I had a good friend in Pa. who was a biology teacher and he did indeed support Creationism as well as professed a personal faith in Christ. No matter how stupid Antlerman tried to make some of us feel, I'll hold onto my faith in Christ and the Bible over some woman who hides behind a screen name and a computer.

I spoke too soon. You do seem to see all of this. Our "side," as it were, most certainly understands that intelligent people (with degrees...doctorates even) believe in creationism. This fact isn't lost on us. Understand, however, that (reading ahead a little) much of this is a result of emotionlism rather than rationalism. It was their "heart" rather than their "mind" that has kept them in this path and their "heart" has led their "mind" to the conclusions more than the evidence. Others simply adapt a more liberal view of the creation story to fit their rational underanding of the world (up to and including the whole thing is simply an allegory...but we were created in some fashion nonetheless).

 

There are some that may consider my last sentence to lack love and patience, but there were times when Christ called out the so called scholars of that day, too.

 

"Do not deceive yourselves. If anyone of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a 'fool' so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written, 'He catches the wise in their craftiness' and again, 'The Lord knows the the thoughts of the wise are futile." (1 Corinthians 3:18-20)

 

This verse is not suggesting anything against an education and knowledge. It is suggesting that those who think they become so wise and educated in their own eyes and deny the truth of the Gospel are completely deceived and blind.

Actually I find it a little amusing that you mention "christ" and the "gospel" then quote Paul. Not only that but that "christ" said that anyone who calls someone a "fool" is at risk of hell themselves (I'm paraphrasing of course). I also find it amusing that the church fathers seem to take quite a bit of pleasure in their own ignorance and many of them wrote about the foolish knowledge of the educated of the day (who, as it turns out, were quite right on many topics) but the "fathers" believed in myths and legends. The "fathers" derided those who turned out to be right while being wrong themselves. I've no doubt they trumpeted similar messages as the ones you have here.

 

PS I will do my best to try to answer every one's post but I'm sorry if I don't. From what I seen from wishful.... she choose to stick to one person b/c it was hard for her to answer all others.... it just became to over whelming.

No worries going point by point. It does tend to become too much for one person to handle.

 

mwc

[Ouroboros]

Mark,

 

Another question for you, can you explain ring species in the view of Creationism? Did God do it because he has extreme sense of humor? And if strata shows the Earth being old and all the fossils we find, did God plant them there to intentionally confuse us? Why does it please him to create a world that have more evidence against him than for him? Did God create all this and evil, pain and suffering too, only to force his creation to bow to him and praise his might? If God really did exist, and he really did create the world according to Genesis, don't you think at least 99% of the evidence would say so, instead of 100% against? It just doesn't make sense my friend, unless God isn't so good and benevolent as you think...

[Antlerman]

Hans, I’m going to let you handle this one. He doesn't sound much of a step up than the other two. I need a break dealing with something a little more challenging right now. Like I said in the other thread, if they think I'm trying to make them look stupid, I'll just step back and let them do that themselves.

 

BTW, newbie from Ohio, please go read these through both of these threads here that I had with a hard-core creationist first before wasting my time. Here: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?showtopic=12795 and here: http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...=12360&st=0

 

If I feel like it later I'll come back for this with you.

 

Have fun guys. It'll be nice to let them address you guys for awhile.

 

P.S. I'm thinking this guy is really here to help them from falling apart with their faith. Like I said before, I give Mr. Wishful under 6 months. He's trying too hard to believe.

[Ouroboros]

Anty, don't be a stranger to this thread. You always have good inputs and so frigging much knowledge that I think they should name a library after you...

 

I have a good feeling about this Mark anyway, so I'm kind expecting more of a coffee table discussion with him. As opposed to the one with Mr. Wishy-washy.

[Former Follier]

... I've been finding a lot of statements that have come out of Yale, Princeton and Harverd where astronomers and geologists pretty strongly support the Genesis account of Creation and the Bible.

MARKS:

 

I'd like to take this thread back a little further than you were hoping to by the latter part of your initial post. I understand that you believe in "Biblical creation". My question is: Which account Biblical account of creation do you subscribe to? Are you aware that there are two differeing accounts of creation only three chapters apart in the book of Genesis?

[Evolution_beyond]

Where did life come from? Nothing??

 

it came from amino acids, nucleic acids etc. Those building blocks of life came from simpler organic compounds such as methane, carbon dioxide etc. (I'm not an expert on those sciences though, so my answers may not be exact - go read a science book if you're really interested)

 

What did the first organism eat?

 

probably the various nutrients left over from the various building blocks of life that didn't become living cells.

 

But after all that was cleared away - scientists reckon the first bacteria probably fed off minerals from volcanic vents.

 

The first living things we have fossil evidence for were cyanobacteria (blue-green algae). They feed off sunlight (like plants do)

 

Why are monkeys still around, and not evolved?

 

evolution is not a straight line. It's more like an ever growing web or net. every organism has evolved over millions of years to be best equipped to its natural environment, and they will continue to evolve to fit into their ecological niche. present-day monkeys have evolved from earlier primates - and humans have also evolved from earlier primates. Humans probably have evolved from something that was very like a monkey, but while humans have evolved into apes and then into humans, monkeys have evolved into even better equipped monkeys. Present-day monkeys are not the same as the primitive monkeys that both humans and the present-day monkeys have evolved from.

 

Monkeys still fill an ecological niche in tropical forests. Humans have evolved as a result of a certain group of apes leaving the forest behind for the plains (probably the other way around actually - the forests decreased in size, prompting a benefit for primates who could walk upright and weild weapons with their hands)

 

There's just too many holes in evolution left unanswered.

When you say I am from a monkey it takes the book of Genesis and throws it in the trash.

 

There are far more holes in christian theology than there are in evolution.

 

Also - evolution does not deny anything that is in the Bible. How do you know that God didn't use evolution to create with? Does using a word processor mean that I didn't write what you are reading here? Why wouldn't God design a tool and then use the tool? Evolution could just be a very useful creation technique that God uses.

 

The only thing evolution seem to deny about the Biblical creation story is the idea that the world was made in six days. However, the whole device of "and there was evening, and there was morning - the first day" etc seems to me to be a poetical device rather than something that is meant to be taken literally. The whole thing is tied into days of the week anyway - clearly an invention of man.

[Grandpa Harley]

and why is 'throwing Genesis in the trash' a point of debate? It's crass emotionalism from someone who has nothing better to offer than 'feelings' or other emotive clap-trap...

 

TBH, I have the same sinking feeling I always do about Jesus' Trolls...

[Guest Marks]

WOW guys.......... You guys are fast....

 

 

Welll..... Give me littl bit of time to take all this in

[Ramen666]

 

Jesus has forseen a hit and run Christian.

[Former Follier]

Don't give us too long to respond or you'll be absolutely inundated with questions. We have a tendency to approach theists more like philosophical pirahnas than gentle little questioning sunfish. I think we may scare off more genuine new members than we'd like. Answers are always welcome. Bring your best.

[Grandpa Harley]

BTW, EB, complex organic molecules are found universally across the observable universe (pardon the Austin-Powers redundancy there) Great clouds of methane, water, and upto stuff that hands out the signals of complex hydrocarbons... it's part of the reason I push the possible origns lof life back to about 8 to 10 Giga-years... It gives the time for the first and second generation supermassive stars to kick out the elements we see being spat out even today in supernovae... H, He, C, N, Cl, O, Si, S and Fe being the key ones

[Grandpa Harley]

Don't give us too long to respond or you'll be absolutely inundated with questions. We have a tendency to approach theists more like philosophical pirahnas than gentle little questioning sunfish. I think we may scare off more genuine new members than we'd like. Answers are always welcome. Bring your best.

 

Wise words, FF.

 

I was saying to my good lady wife, a much put upon woman, about Jesus Trolls...

 

some of the piranha attitude is due to the fact that most here are cult survivors... that's addict territory... Imagine the reception of a Smirnoff Salesman turning up at an AA meeting and pushing samples...

[Ouroboros]

Don't give us too long to respond or you'll be absolutely inundated with questions. We have a tendency to approach theists more like philosophical pirahnas than gentle little questioning sunfish. I think we may scare off more genuine new members than we'd like. Answers are always welcome. Bring your best.

Initiation through fire. It's not for nothing we call it "The Lion's Den". If you survive, you're worthy, IMO.

[Guest Marks]

Actually I find it a little amusing that you mention "christ" and the "gospel" then quote Paul. Not only that but that "christ" said that anyone who calls someone a "fool" is at risk of hell themselves (I'm paraphrasing of course). I also find it amusing that the church fathers seem to take quite a bit of pleasure in their own ignorance and many of them wrote about the foolish knowledge of the educated of the day (who, as it turns out, were quite right on many topics) but the "fathers" believed in myths and legends. The "fathers" derided those who turned out to be right while being wrong themselves. I've no doubt they trumpeted similar messages as the ones you have here.

 

 

I'm so glad that you found my post amusing. Everything is getting more and more amusing all the time. I hope that you take time to re-read the part you just referred too. The VERSE that I quoted had nothing to do with Christ calling people out. Do you see a break between thoughts?.............. Goooooddddd, you do see that after all. So then you must realize that there was a change in thoughts. Also, whenever someone denies the Bible as it is written also denies the Gospel of Christ.

 

(Notice that there is now a change in thought, because of the space between the last line and what I'm about to say.) I see the word fool caught your eye. I'm sure you'll study the context of both of the passages that you are referring to, because in them will come understanding.

 

Oh and you guys questioned the benevolence of God in one of your well taken, finger pointing statements. Thank you so much for reminding me of God being a generous God. "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, (without finding fault) and it will be given to him. (James 1:5)

 

Keep smiling and keep a good thought.

[Guest Marks]

All the answers can be found at the creation museum http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/walkthrough/

[Ramen666]

All the answers can be found at the creation museum http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/walkthrough/

 

Of all the answers you use the Creation Musuem? The one with the dinousaurs and man together Right there that museum looses all credibilty.

Why not use your own brain and not something else someone is feeding you that may help.

[Grandpa Harley]

"Also, whenever someone denies the Bible as it is written also denies the Gospel of Christ."

 

 

Actually no, one denies the Council of Trent in 1545 to 1563... to deny the OT is to deny that Clement of Alexandria was infallible... seems you put a lot of faith in the editorial abilities of semi-literate 'Bishops' (Mad Clem) and the Roman Catholic Church... The 'Gospel' (news) of Jesus isn't denied per se, just cast in a different light...

 

Nice to see you're a fan of very bad science too

[Former Follier]

All the answers can be found at the creation museum http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/walkthrough/

"All the answers can be found here," huh? Wow! It sure is convenient that you just happened across a website that shares all of your already formed beliefs. Or... would it be God's will? Or sheer laziness? Who's voting for the latter?

 

Can you please answer my question (in your own words) from the first page of this topic? I'd sure appreciate it.