Did God use evolution to create life

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

You shouldn't be. Pel is right.

Jason's cool. But I think he could really be something special if he set aside this "weight."

[BroGary]

Originally Posted by pelathais

No, BroGary. "Evolution would have you believe" that man and apes share a common ancestor. Have you ever bothered to study the issue?



You said earlier:

"the Bible clearly says that each species produces after it OWN kind"

... But now you say that there are "different kinds" of specimens found within a single "species." Which is it?



Those clowns were refuted long ago on this forum.

Non-humans can only produce non-humans, and not non-humans evolving into humans.

You can have different breeds of dogs, but that is not the same as different species.

They may have been refuted "in your mind", but I do not believe they were truely refuted.

Evolution was fabricated as part of a humanist effort to turn people away from the God of the Bible.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

http://www.sixdaycreation.com/

http://www.icr.org/

http://www.creationism.org/

[Mr. Smith]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Jason's cool. But I think he could really be something special if he set aside this "weight."

I totally agree. He's a sharp guy and willing to stand for something. But he's making progress.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Mr. Smith

Mr. Spiritual Badejo, it has nothing to do with God's ability and everything to do with God's methodology. Have you considered that God is powerful enough to have use evolutionary methodology to create our existence?

When God said

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.

I take it you do not understand evolution. You do seem to understand speciation. But that creates no new structures. Evolution has said that it is by reason of mutations that we have change over time. Of course out of 800,000 mutations, 1 is beneficial. The rest are detrimental and out of those most are fatal.
No one can show a way in which a 3 chamber heart can in a single step scoot the pulmonary artery to the aorta without killing the animal. But they say 4 chambered hearts came from 3 chambered hearts.
I can from memory give dozens of impossiblilties in evolution. The Darwinists do not have the fossils to prove what they claim.
Evolutionists argue life came from non life.
It has never been observed.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by BroGary

Non-humans can only produce non-humans, and not non-humans evolving into humans.

You can have different breeds of dogs, but that is not the same as different species.

They may have been refuted "in your mind", but I do not believe they were truely refuted.

Evolution was fabricated as part of a humanist effort to turn people away from the God of the Bible.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

http://www.sixdaycreation.com/

http://www.icr.org/

http://www.creationism.org/

Amen. If God was either passive or outside creation, His authority is limited or non existent.

But that brings up the non telological arguments.

[coadie]

23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

12And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13And the evening and the morning were the third day.


I know the folks that take biology clases get stumped when they say millions of years and can't explain how plants were created the day before sunshine for photosynthesis.
How did these plants live for millions of years without heat and sunlight?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by BroGary

Non-humans can only produce non-humans, and not non-humans evolving into humans.

You can have different breeds of dogs, but that is not the same as different species.

They may have been refuted "in your mind", but I do not believe they were truely refuted.

Evolution was fabricated as part of a humanist effort to turn people away from the God of the Bible.

Evolution was an observed process that was universally held by the educated masses in the West long before Charles Darwin came on the scene. It was C. Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin who help to organize the discussion and is generally credited with coining the term "evolution." There was obviously a long discussion already in the works that was wanting the minting of the term.

You seem to err on a couple of other points as well. "Humanism" during the Renaissance was simply a field of study where the subject of study was human beings. "Classical humanism" was and still is a branch of university study that was developed by Christians and for Christians.

That more recent groups of "neo-humanists" have turned toward atheistic and entirely materialistic studies shouldn't cause us to trash the term "humanist.' You wouldn't even have you King James Bible if it weren't for the long and hard labors of the humanist Desiderius Erasmus, for whom Erasmus Darwin was named.

You said different "kinds" of dogs earlier, after defining just what you thought a "kind" was according to your overly literalistic reading of Genesis 1. Now, you offer the term "breeds."

Could it be that you were actually on the path toward truth all along? What happens when a particular breed of dog is so "different" from other breeds that it can no longer mate with those other breeds? This is an event called "speciation."

One example of an observed instance of speciation would be the famous case of the mule. Horses and donkeys evolved from a common ancestor. Due to their geographic isolation from one another their genes "drifted" apart as well. In time, humans corralled both donkeys and horses and tried to hybridize them. The result was the infertile mule.

If the donkeys and horses had been kept isolated from one another for an even longer period of time, they would not be able to breed with each other at all.

Did God create both donkeys and horses? Two separate species? If so, what's a mule? An "abomination? But then, why do these two separate species (horses and donkeys) produce any kind of offspring at all?

It's like we're observing the "in between" of a complex process. You're "fixed species" model simply doesn't provide any answers here.

Christian evolutionary scientists: http://www.asa3online.org/home/

... which is somewhat redundant. If you don't understand and support evolutionary theory then you're really not a "scientist" at all.

[coadie]

The Roman Catholic Church had never formally condemned the theory of evolution. However, in 1950, Pope Pius XII issued a papal encyclical letter Humani Generis which discouraged belief in evolution because it played into the hands of materialists and Atheists. Since approximately that time, the Church taught that the Genesis creation story should not be interpreted literally, but symbolically.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

When God said

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.

I take it you do not understand evolution. You do seem to understand speciation. But that creates no new structures. Evolution has said that it is by reason of mutations that we have change over time. Of course out of 800,000 mutations, 1 is beneficial. The rest are detrimental and out of those most are fatal.
No one can show a way in which a 3 chamber heart can in a single step scoot the pulmonary artery to the aorta without killing the animal. But they say 4 chambered hearts came from 3 chambered hearts.
I can from memory give dozens of impossiblilties in evolution. The Darwinists do not have the fossils to prove what they claim.
Evolutionists argue life came from non life.
It has never been observed.

If you're the same "coadie" then I should probably put you on "ignore" as this topic was the cause of your most recent "vacation."

I wish you no ill will and offer you the consideration that everything is "water under the bridge."

FWIW - my nephew was born earlier this month with a three chamber heart. We are waiting for him to put on a few more pounds before they correct the condition surgically. I'm told that the surgical procedure will be sort of like a "one step" type of operation.

Still, how was he born like this? Both of his parents have "typical" four chambered hearts like most mammals. Wouldn't they be expected to "reproduce after their own kind?"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2747104/
http://www.biologynews.net/archives/...le_hearts.html

Turns out, if you look at the reptiles you will see the development of the heart from the three chambered amphibian type of heart into the mammalian four chamber heart.

We talked about this before... funny, I can't find that thread. Anyhoo...

When a specific enzyme is inhibited during fetal development a human being can actually end up with an "amphibian" three chambered heart. The "one step process" that coadie seeks is the removal of any factors that interfere with the expression of this enzyme.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by coadie

The Roman Catholic Church had never formally condemned the theory of evolution. However, in 1950, Pope Pius XII issued a papal encyclical letter Humani Generis which discouraged belief in evolution because it played into the hands of materialists and Atheists. Since approximately that time, the Church taught that the Genesis creation story should not be interpreted literally, but symbolically.

Since 1950? Really? Ever read St. Augustine (354 - 430 AD). What about Origen? He was really big on the "symbolic" side of things (185 -254 AD).