Creation vs Evolution

[crossroad]

There is no book of Enoch in the Bible. It was removed from Scriptures by the Sanhedrin in 90AD.

Oh , I see
So this book that gives you all the answers has had bits taken away from it , whodathunkit .
So your arguement for creation is based on a heavily altered , heavily edited multiply mistranslated document .

The silence comes as a result of loaded questions.
perhaps you should have remained silent

Let me educate you on how the Bible came about. Although the details are some what sketchy, depening on who you talk to, The earliest Christian canon is dated to around 100 AD, and at the time did not include the New Testament. The Bible is actually a compilation of books that early Christians found inspiring in worship and teaching and was not canonized until around 397 AD. So, the Bible did not exist as the Bible until the 4th century. The books you speak of that were omited (BTW, there are thousands of writings that are not in the Bible) say nothing about creation, so I'm not sure what that has to do with the subject (other than more rantings from grasping-at-straws evolutionists).

[rory_20_uk]

Who set the cannon? A man did. Who edited out all the other stuff? Men. I don't see where god fits in at all. All the other books contained nothing about creation??!? WOW! You're read them all? All of them! I thought many of them were incomplete or destroyed. Or you're lying.

I guess I can see how you think most of the workd is grasping at straws. Any person who compares the world to a greenhouse can believe anything...

One explanation from one site...
"Question: Where did the light come from before the sun and moon were created?
Answer: The light in the first three days was probably from God himself."

He created the light coming from himself? I have to take my hat off to them managing to shoehorn something to fit the text...

Question: Why should I believe that the Christian Bible's story of creation rather than evolution?

Answer: Creation and evolution are frameworks to think about the past. In the strict sense neither is science since science is done by REPEATABLE experiments in the PRESENT. The Christian version is the only correct one because it is true and is documented from the very beginning. All other creation stories can't be true if the Christian version is true. Either it's true or not. If it's not what historical documentation can be produced to substantiate another view? None as powerful as the Bible!!! Order from chaos conflicts with ALL we know about the real world. The laws of physics, the order in living things, information theory, etc. etc. I recommend the newly published book by Michael Behe (an evolutionist) as a place to help answer the question of order from chaos.

I love the bit "all others can't be true if the Christian version is true... Oh, and the Bible is the Best! (Ignoring it is a rip off of the Torah).

Thus I view this site as extremely low grade "evidence", since it is "we're right, you're wrong" when it comes down to requiring proof.

Why the bible? Loads of other "holy" books around. Why not one of them? And which version of the Bible? There are so many! And let's not get into the inconsistencies...

Since you'd not accept microevolution unless you saw it with your own eyes (made even more difficult as yours would most likely be closed) the evidence required to prove this to you is greater than the proof for any event in the Bible itself.

[crossroad]

Who set the cannon? A man did. Who edited out all the other stuff? Men. I don't see where god fits in at all. All the other books contained nothing about creation??!? WOW! You're read them all? All of them! I thought many of them were incomplete or destroyed. Or you're lying.

typo, thanks for pointing that out. I was talking about the book of Enoch.

You have to be careful what you write in some of these threads. I see that some hillbilly evolutionist cannot understand information as a whole, but can only attack tid-bit unintended points. Maybe I should attack the following:

Since you'd not accept microevolution unless you saw it with your own eyes (made even more difficult as yours would most likely be closed) the evidence required to prove this to you is greater than the proof for any event in the Bible itself.

SO, MICROEVOLUTION IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!!!! OH MY!!! DID EVOLUTION SPEED UP TO A RATE THAT CAN BE SEEN HAPPENING WITH THE HUMAN EYE? ARE YOU INSUINATING THAT TIME HAVE CHANGED DREMATICALLY?

I could go on.

I guess I can see how you think most of the workd is grasping at straws. Any person who compares the world to a greenhouse can believe anything....

Until you actually look at the evidence (I better say, go back and click on the links or else you may go off on how I've presented no evidence, no I better post - http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...=view&page=233 you will continue to open your mouth in ignorance. (Sorry again, I ment speak)

One explanation from one site...
"Question: Where did the light come from before the sun and moon were created?
Answer: The light in the first three days was probably from God himself."

He created the light coming from himself? I have to take my hat off to them managing to shoehorn something to fit the text....

So, God can speak everything into existance, but can't light things up while waiting for the third day? (Another example of tidbit hunting.)

Thus I view this site as extremely low grade "evidence", since it is "we're right, you're wrong" when it comes down to requiring proof.

You never gave the name of the site. Typical. Have you considered the other Creation Science web sites? Have you checked out http://www.irc.org? Or, will you blindly discount them because of your biased unresearched views?

Why the bible? Loads of other "holy" books around. Why not one of them? And which version of the Bible? There are so many! And let's not get into the inconsistencies....

No one that I know of has said, "Only the Bible". Typical again. Try to remember the past posts before you make claims like this. Which version of the Bible? - All of them. There are a few that were translated loosly, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to discover which ones.

[Avicenna]

SO, MICROEVOLUTION IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!!!! OH MY!!! DID EVOLUTION SPEED UP TO A RATE THAT CAN BE SEEN HAPPENING WITH THE HUMAN EYE? ARE YOU INSUINATING THAT TIME HAVE CHANGED DREMATICALLY?

Does that have ANY relevance to the quote WHATSOEVER? If it does, please point it out, I'd love to know.

Until you actually look at the evidence (I better say, go back and click on the links or else you may go off on how I've presented no evidence, no I better post - http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...=view&page=233 you will continue to open your mouth in ignorance. (Sorry again, I ment speak)

"I'm right and you're wrong nah-nah-nah-nah-boo-boo," sounds extrememly childish to me, blindly following what people wrote down a few thousand years ago.

So, God can speak everything into existance, but can't light things up while waiting for the third day? (Another example of tidbit hunting.)

So, did the stars get made and just NOT produce any light WHATSOEVER until something says do it?

[crossroad]

Does that have ANY relevance to the quote WHATSOEVER? If it does, please point it out, I'd love to know.

Do you speak english, or are you useing one of those web browser translators? I bet you don't even realize that you just made my point (the point I made in the post you were quoting)

"I'm right and you're wrong nah-nah-nah-nah-boo-boo," sounds extrememly childish to me, blindly following what people wrote down a few thousand years ago.

Thanks again! I posted research that you choose to ignore. Are you writing about yourself in this one?

[Avicenna]

Yes, I speak english. Words such as 'insuinating' and 'drematically' don't appear in my vocabulary though. You just spouted a whole load of rubbish hoping to intimidate people into avoid looking at the horridly spelt caps locked passage, as you had NOTHING relevant to say. Micro-evolution happens between generations, so you cannot see it in front of your eyes. Which is your argument, which is, frankly, rubbish.

Your links include people saying that what the bible is true because it says so and hence everything is wrong. I just put it in simple terms so that you might finally after a long time get the point.

[Zain]

I respect your belief. But you're right, it is faith. No evidence but hearsay. I'm glad you've seen good things happen because of that faith. But I'm sure you are also aware many very terrible things have happened because of that blind faith in God too.

Faith and science are based on very different things. It is certainly possible to reconcile your faith in your God with evolutionary theory. Indeed, many argue evolution would be a very creditable reflection on a supernatural being.

I'm tired too. I would urge you to read the books I recommended and stop feeling that your faith is threatened by evolution. But to remain stubborn is equally your choice.

Being faithful doesn't require you to stop thinking.

My religion is based on Creationism, Evolution is not Creationism, so therefore it's always going to "threaten", but yes, I will always study on this, it's very intresting to me.

What is there to explain?

Which argument is ironclad? The first one is anyting but ironclad. the second is a) a complete strawman and b) not ironclad, at least not the "supernatural" part.

He was talking about the changes in people's lives, and they're true.

Zain: natural selection will inevitably lead to more and more mutations accumulating and becoming dominant, which leads to the evolution of a species. If you can accept natural selection, it should be easy to accept evolution. Or so I like to think

So, something that nobody has seen ever says something which nobody has heard and it is an ironclad statement? Well, frankly, that just cracks me up.

By the way, evolution has changed lives very significantly as well. So have politicians, but does it mean that you trust in whatever they say?

Mutations? No, simple changes due to casted out genes. I can not accept the Evolution saying that something changes for no reason. I do, however, will accept Natural Selection. What changes have evolution made? Does it make someone a better person?

Sure but it expalins why you won't see 'macro-evolution' and does based on science (carbon dating and all that) instead of faith.

Genetic algoritmes are computer programs, just lines of code to solve complex optimization problems.

Also: info on the evolution of the eye !

I understand that as far as that goes, it's long term. Computer Programs, in the human body? I'm probably missing something, can you help me out a little to understand this?

Everything else I wrote got ignored? Noa's flood, microbe biology 101.

Is that due to lack of defence for the points raised?

That Jesus was raised from the dead is Ironclad to Christians. Noone else. Basically why it's a belief. Please, let's keep belief and evidence seperate! One can believe whatever they want. That's fine.

natural selection is evolution. Organisms selected naturally which slowly over time evolve.

What was ignored?

Yes, I speak english. Words such as 'insuinating' and 'drematically' don't appear in my vocabulary though. You just spouted a whole load of rubbish hoping to intimidate people into avoid looking at the horridly spelt caps locked passage, as you had NOTHING relevant to say. Micro-evolution happens between generations, so you cannot see it in front of your eyes. Which is your argument, which is, frankly, rubbish.

He was being sarcastic!!!

[rory_20_uk]

Zain, this is very patronising, but you are very young. It's good to see that you are thinking about things. No one has all the answers, but it doesn't mean you shouldn't ask the questions.

The world is full of omnivores and carnivores. Sure, the dinosaurs were too, but there is no evidence man killed them.

Wooly Mammoths and sabre toothed tigres on the other hand had intimate knowledge of man - we killed lots of one and were sometimes the dinner of the other. There are human bones with scars from sabre tooth tigers for example.

The earth covered with water. Where did it all come from? Where did it all go? And in 40 days remember!

A boat with the capacity for all that food??!?

Fossils are not dated by the depth that they are buried. The exact method depends, but the radioactive decay or carbon or the Argon / Potassium ratio is usually used. Fossils can be on the surface or miles underground. These values are not altered by much except time.

Crocodiles are not dinosaurs. They lived at the same time, but they are not the same. Different bone structure for example.

[crossroad]

Yes, I speak english. Words such as 'insuinating' and 'drematically' don't appear in my vocabulary though..

I will have to give you that round. I have to admit, I'm not the best speller.

You just spouted a whole load of rubbish hoping to intimidate people into avoid looking at the horridly spelt caps locked passage, as you had NOTHING relevant to say. Micro-evolution happens between generations, so you cannot see it in front of your eyes. Which is your argument, which is, frankly, rubbish..

The caps locked micro-evolution post was sarcasm. Go back and read post 181 very carefully. I was making fun of those who miss the point of some posts.

Your links include people saying that what the bible is true because it says so and hence everything is wrong. I just put it in simple terms so that you might finally after a long time get the point.

I agree that this line of reasoning is week. But have you honestly browsed web sites like http://www.icr.org/? Really, all thread-debating-becasue-its-a-blast-to-spout-our-opinions aside, have you looked at what Creation Science has uncovered that the main stream media is avoiding? Really? Give me an honest answer. Have you tried to take what they are saying and debunk it? I'm not talking about "The Bible is true because it says so" kind of statements, I'm talking about the actual science that is being published, the discoveries that fly in the face of evolution.