Sure it’s testable: do we see examples of this in short-lifespan organisms? Yes. Do we see examples of this as fossils? Yes.
Neither are hurricanes, and yet we can describe them pretty well.
Until we add a long enough period of time for those changes to produce separate species (by “long enough”, I mean somewhere between decades and tens of millions of years, depending on conditions).
Allopolyploidy can create a new species in a single generation, by making the descendant population reproductively incompatible with the parent population.
It’s really a rather inconvenient reason, as it makes testing of mechanisms much more difficult than one might like.
They are in the fossil record, like going from early Cambrian “monoplacophorans” to neogastropods or Myllokunmingiidae to modern mammals.
But they are intermediate in age and morphology between lancelet-like proto-chordates and more standard fish.
They are intermediate in age and morphology between proto-lobopodians and more modern groups of arthropods.
No, they don’t. They show a clear directional trend over time from normal rostroconchs to modern scaphopods.
Not under any standard definition of a species–Busycon maximum and Busycon carica have no morphological overlap, Ensis directus and Ensis leei have no morphological overlap, Pelycidion matthewi and Pelycision megalomastoma have no morphological overlap, and the list can go on.
That’s definitely wrong given the population sizes that I’m dealing with.
They are sufficiently close in morphology to the older fossil species and the living species to make that untenable.
No, it is based purely on observation of their stratigraphic position and morphology.
They are intermediate in age and morphology between many stem-synapsids and standard mammals.
They are intermediate in morphology between earlier sarcopterygian fish and more modern amphibians.
I am talking about exactly what molecular clock dating does.
They are the same thing.
I see them because they are there. They are intermediate in stratigraphic position and morphology between other taxa. If they were not intermediate in morphology and stratigraphic position, then I would not conclude that they are intermediates.
Again, if they are variations within a species, then that requires redefining “species”, pathology is incompatible with hundreds of specimens, and completely different species is incompatible with the levels of difference between them.
What and where are they? Until and unless demonstrable and precise barriers can be found, this is simply an unevidenced assertion.
There are roughly equal numbers of slightly beneficial and slightly deleterious mutations. Extremely deleterious mutations are much more common than extremely beneficial mutations, but the former don’t accumulate, so the occasional highly beneficial mutations will be significant.
This is an unquantified assertion, not an empirical mathematical reality. If this used actual, measured rates of different types of mutations, then it would be interesting.
I have considered that possibility, and found it unconvincing.
You’re asking for something that shouldn’t exist as evidence for something it would not be evidence for.
No, it is not, unless I and every one of my colleagues in molluscan systematics doesn’t know what we are doing.
There is a paradigm-level difference but that difference is not between scientists and believers, it is between those who interpret Genesis through the modern worldview and those who study the original message by trying to understand how the sender and the receivers understood the message (interpretation through the original context, with an ANE worldview). The difference between the worldviews is so huge that the interpretations become radically different.
The YEC interpretations are the consequence of filtering the Genesis texts through the modern worldview. If Genesis would be understood as the original receivers understood it, YEC would loose its theological basis. So, the basic difference is not in how we interpret the scientific data, it is in the way how we interpret Genesis. Disagreements in scientific matters are just a side effect of disagreements in the interpretation (exegesis) of the Genesis text.
Edit:
If Genesis one is interpreted literarily through the modern worldview, we should accept that earth is surrounded by chaotic waters, around, below and above the earth (Genesis 1:6-7). Also, we should accept that the earth is covered by a solid firmament that separates the chaotic waters below and above the firmament and also the earthly and heavenly realms. The earthly realm is where humans and animals live, heavenly realm is where the heavenly creatures live. Information about the earthly and heavenly realms comes mainly from the other scripture as Genesis one is focusing on the creation of the environment for the earthly creatures as well as the creation of these entities.
We should also accept that light was created before the two lights on the firmament (sun and moon) and also the plants were created before the two lights.
There has been considerable squirming to somehow make these parts of Genesis one acceptable in the light of the modern worldview. All these details fit well to the context of the writing, the ANE worldview.
The problem is YEC is trying to make the text and scientific understanding merge into seamless truth. But they only do that on certain things, it’s a inconsistent literalism. For example you may disagree that Jesus (who is the literal truth embodied) was being non literal about the Lords supper, but scientifically literal about the creation?
Then some fundamentalist read revelation in a literal way to promote dispensationalism.
Fundamentalism is inconsistent in its hermeneutics. Its interpretations similar to Rome are declared infallible.
I have offered a Christological explanation of the entire Bible. Christ’s coming into the world is the truth walking around. His incarnation, death and resurrection are the true epicenter of reality. From this center radiates outward all things from creation to consummation.
I have no idea… If the narrative is both historical and literal then it is 100% supernatural. Meaning the events of Genesis 1-11 cannot and will never be scientifically aligned.
I am fine with YEC IF it drops all attempts to validate modern scientific observation with the holy text. Meaning the events of Gen 1-11 are Gods direct and immediate supernatural control over the elements. Thus we would not expect to find any co oberation with nature as we observe today.
What I do believe is that the Scripture is very clear that God uses parables…
This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet: “I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter what has been hidden since the foundation of the world.” Mark 4:11
And he said to them, “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables,
And he said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables?
Parables are a way to communicate true reality veiled in a obscure story. The understanding of a parable separates people. The blessed know the truth about the story, the hard hearted don’t understand.
Luke 8 9-11
9 And when his disciples asked him what this parable meant, 10 he said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables, so that ‘seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.’
Did God use parables and visions to the prophets of Old? yes. If we use a consistent Christological hermeneutic one could argue that Genesis 1-11 is a true parable about creation that points God’s chosen people to Jesus Christ.
Logical biblical inference
God uses parables and vison’s to teach prophets religious truth.
Moses was a prophet who wrote Genesis
God used parables to teach Moses about creation through Christ.
Was the original creation state bad or good? Bad
Was Adam created dead or alive ? Dead
The literal account is one of darkness to light, death to life. Disorder to order.
Only God is Good and Holy. God is not divisible, He did not use his goodness to make creation. The creation is made in juxtaposition to God to prove this fact. Then God applies His goodness into that juxtaposition to make it better. That is why the death of Christ and the creation are connected. No cross, No creation.
God -------------------- Creation GEN 1vs1,2
Light -------------------> Dark
Full(omnipresent)------> Void
Law (perfect order)-----> Chaos
We are not Pantheist, The creation and God are not ontologically or morally equal nor ever will be. The creation is not of divinity or will ever be equal with God. He is always above and beyond.
Thanks for the conversation Jon, it is helping me verbalise my current understanding.
Iron sharpens iron.
Dear Troy,
Firstly, I thank the Lord that He has made this clear to me, for without Him, I would be lost.
I honestly do not see creationists “trying to make the text and scientific understanding merge into seamless truth,” that really makes no sense to me, though it obviously makes sense to you.
What I know is the Bible has been translated by many thousands of intelligent, good, honest and diligent people over hundreds of years, and they ALL arrive at basically the precise same result, i.e., a historical narrative of the creation and the flood, they were real events in real history.
I don’t see why anyone would doubt that exceedingly obvious fact, unless of course there is another agenda in play, for which the clearly historical narrative of Genesis is inconsistent or an inconvenient reality, that in order to fit that alternate agenda, the exceedingly obvious real history of the Genesis creation and flood accounts, must be refuted through an entirely different interpretation.
Hence we have the situation whereby any Christian who is stating precisely what the author of Genesis ever so painstakingly, carefully and clearly writes as real history, is mocked by some, attacked by others and/or ridiculed as though they are attempting to force a modern scientific view onto Genesis.
It just so happens that there are many obedient good Christians who believe and trust the Holy Scriptures, who understand parables, who can readily discern Biblical literary genres and know beyond any doubt where the Bible is written as poetry, or prophecy, or literal historical narrative or metaphor etc…
Probably, amongst the most vocal of these faithful and obedient good Christians in the western world that are proclaiming the Gospel (as we are commanded to do by our Loving God), are what you and others on this Theistic Evolution website term as YEC’s or Young Earth Creationist’s.
From where I stand, observing the debates on this site, it is not the creationists who are forcing a modern scientific view onto Genesis, it is the TEC’s or Theistic Evolutionists that claim the creation is billions of years old and evolution is how God created.
After all, aren’t ‘deep time’ and ‘evolution’ the current atheist modern scientific view?
Thus in TRUTH, this is perhaps one of the most classic cases of the pot calling the kettle black that I have ever witnessed!
It is more than a little ironic, that in TRUTH Young Earth Creationist’s are defending Biblical authority and accuracy and are in TRUTH refuting the atheist modern scientific view.
Again to reiterate, in TRUTH it is the Theistic Evolutionists who are forcing a modern scientific view onto the Bible and onto Genesis in particular and then obfuscating by deviously, claiming it is the Young Earth Creationist’s who are forcing a modern scientific view onto the Bible.
It is very unfortunate, and I wish it wasn’t so, but in TRUTH the other word for it is hypocrisy.
But Troy, I never, ever thought that Theistic Evolutionists were Pantheists.
Absolutely! At least we both agree on that!
Thank you too Troy, it is a pleasant change to have a discussion with a fellow brother in Jesus Christ our Lord who is forthright and honest about his beliefs.
Dear Knor,
thank you for your thoughts on this, it is appreciated. I apologise in advance, if what I have to say here comes across as gruff or self righteous, or offends, please understand that is not my intention.
I find it hard to comprehend why anyone would want to apply what they believe Ancient Near East pagan civilisations understood and believed as if doing that is some sort of ‘Rosetta Stone key’ for interpreting the Bible.
Interpreting the Bible through what you think was an Ancient Near East pagan civilisations understanding makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
How do you really know what Ancient Near East pagan civilisations understood?
What makes you believe that Ancient Near East pagan civilisations understanding was uniformly the same as the understanding held by believers in the Living God of the Bible, the Israelites?
I believe that God in His omniscience inspired the Bible to be completely understandable by ALL peoples of ALL times in history, and thus, this counter intuitive ANE push to attempt to interpret the Bible through what you interpret as the understanding of Ancient Near East pagan civilisations in TRUTH appears to me at least, to be a devious way of bringing a completely different agenda to the interpretation of Genesis and the Bible as a whole. The word ‘deception’ comes to mind!
But as I have just explained to Troy, that statement is the precise opposite of the reality and it is demonstrably false.
Yes, "we should accept that light was created before the two lights on the firmament (sun and moon) and also the plants were created before the two lights."
Doesn’t the Bible in Genesis 1:2 tell us that God was there at the creation, “and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters”?
Doesn’t the Bible in Revelation 21:23 tell us that, " And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God has illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb?"
Why do you doubt and believe that light must always come from the sun?
Why do you doubt and believe that plants must have the sun first before they were created?
To be perfectly honest, in TRUTH it is plainly evident that it is your modern scientific view that you are forcing onto scripture that causes you to see inconsistencies here.
Again, what am I to make of such nonsense?
What squirming?
It is not I, or creationists that are FORCING both Billions of Years and Evolution onto Scripture!
Question: What is the “modern worldview” or modern scientific worldview?
Answer: It is the belief that nothing exploded and became everything (Big Bang) and then Chemical Evolution naturalistically created life (Abiogenesis), and then over billions upon billions of years of death, misery, and suffering, evolution increased that life from a single cell to the broad diversity of life on Earth.
That does sound very much like what Theistic Evolutionists believe.
However, I have witnessed here, Theistic Evolutionists constantly hammering it home that it is creationists who are forcing a modern scientific worldview onto the Holy Scriptures, and particularly in Genesis, which is the precise opposite of what is REALLY occurring
I am honestly truly amazed that Theistic Evolutionists are either blind or willingly refuse to see this obvious TRUTH!
Thus, the deceitfully blatant lie against fellow Christians, that is your brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ our Lord, who are Bible believing creationists continues on this site unabated.
May the Lord forgive and have mercy on those that propagate such deceit.
One principle of exegesis (critical interpretation of the text) is that we should try to understand the context of the writing and how the original receivers understood the message. If we do not understand the context and how the original receivers understood the message, we miss at least part of the original message and misunderstand some part of it.
Research within the last 50 years has improved our understanding of the ANE cultures and languages very much, so we can understand their world and thinking much better than we did 50 years ago.
Worldviews have changed a lot during history and the interpretation of the text depends on our worldview. It is a false assumption that people living in ancient cultures would understand the stories in the same way as we do. All people of all times do not understand the stories in the same way.
OT texts are part of ANE culture, rather than being just influenced by ‘Ancient Near East pagan civilisations’. When we read Genesis, we are reading an ANE text. What we read is part of one ANE culture. You cannot separate Genesis from ANE without making violence to the text.
For a few extreme examples of where better knowledge of the ANE helps understand the Bible:
The Bible never gives detailed descriptions of supposed attributes of other “gods”, like Ba’al Hadad or Ba’al Melquart; from looking at Aramean, Phoenician, and Ugaritic texts, we can have a better sense of the unstated common knowledge in the Bible of what the neighbors were doing wrong.
The occurrences in the plagues systematically demonstrate the complete impotence of different major Egyptian gods, which is not obvious unless we know what were important deities in Egypt at that time, as the original audience did.
The usage in Psalms of God “riding on clouds” (or similar language) is appropriated from descriptions of Ba’al as an expression of YHWH’s power over him.
I absolutely donot claim to be an authority, I am not, I can only give you my imperfect understanding of what I believe and hopefully give you an understandable reason of why I believe what I do.
The Bible is God’s Word to humanity, I don’t think many here would disagree with that.
The main reason why I trust the Bible is because God says it is his Word and God does not lie, and because God has proven to me personally, I can trust and take Him seriously in my life.
I do believe that our omniscient God who awesomely and incomprehensibly powerfully spoke the universe into existence, Who created the Heavens and the Earth, Who is the only Living God, Who lives in eternity is far more than capable of ensuring His profound Word to mankind about the most foundational tenets of our existence, that is, the Origin of the problems of Sin and Death; and the Gospel that provides us with the Solution to the problems of Sin and Death
was written in a manner understandable to ALL Peoples of ALL times in history and those foundational tenets are woven throughout the fabric of, the very Gospel of salvation itself.
We are reliably informed by Paul in his letter to Timothy:
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Timothy 3:14-17 KJV
OR, in roughly four hundred years more recently the translation below:
14 You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:14-17 NASB 1995
Ultimately, though different, both translations convey the same profound truth.
Think about it, we are told in the Gospels that Jesus when speaking to the crowds of people and the teachers and priests about the Holy Scriptures, He said, “It is written”, on many occasions, because even though the Holy Scriptures were written a few thousand years earlier, Jesus knew that those crowds of people and the teachers and priests whom He was addressing would understand the Scriptures as they are written.
Jesus did not say to those people, you need to interpret the Scriptures by performing a detailed exegesis of what you think people understood when they were first written, (although doing that is a consideration, and in some parts of Scripture is important), it is not the key to understanding the Genesis history of the creation and flood accounts, as they are as clear as they could possibly be.
My understanding of how to interpret the Scriptures is to use the Bible itself to interpret the Bible itself.
Thus to repeat, yes, looking at the context of the text in terms of when it was written is an important consideration that should be included, however it is not the be all and end all of understanding the message, that God is giving us through the Holy Scriptures.
Yes the Scriptures were written by people, but they were people who were inspired by God.
I hope we all believe as I do that matter and energy and the fundamental constants of the universe, the strong and weak nuclear forces, electromagnetism and gravity and time were made by God, thus it is not at all difficult to believe that where God wished that His message be communicated in an absolutely clear manner beyond any misunderstanding, He made absolutely certain that all peoples of all times would have no doubt in their understanding of exactly what He wants us to know.
There is absolutely no doubt that Genesis was:
1.) written as a historical account,
2.) believed to be such throughout most of church history (until people began looking for ‘ways out’ due to the revival of ancient pagan long-ages beliefs), and
3.) regarded as such by the Lord Jesus Christ and the New Testament authors.
Further, Genesis is all about the Origin of the problems of Sin and Death; the Gospel is all about the Solution to the problems of Sin and Death.
To accept a long-ages ‘deep time’ scenario means not only denying the obviously global Flood recorded in around three full chapters of God’s Word, it also means accepting that billions of years of death, bloodshed and suffering occurred before sin could be blamed for it; i.e., Death becomes God’s normality, not an intruder into a perfect world, and certainly not, as Paul puts it in 1 Corinthians 15 the “last enemy”.
Yes, there are other parts of the Holy Scriptures that are less clear, such as some prophecy, but when it comes to the genre of historical narrative as we clearly see Genesis is, there is no doubt in my mind the straightforward creation and global flood accounts are written factually and faithfully record the real events as God ensured the author conveys ever so unambiguously.
If your systematic theology means that you confess to a 6,000 year old Earth, and that is that, then cling to that dogma. Declare science anathema, proscribe microscopes and telescopes, and hold fast. People follow all sorts of doctrines I may not agree with, but have no interest in contesting.
But the problem is that like a moth to the flame YEC just cannot leave science alone and every single time you dig down into the details, the misinformation, selective fudging, fabrication, and misrepresentation surfaces. All of it. Jeanson’s kinds where a pair of cats gets off the ark, diversifies into hundreds of species in a few centuries, then most of them just up and go extinct. How does that make sense? Think about it, try to visualize it. The Bible separates the sheep from the goats, but not Jeanson. Accelatated Nuclear decay has not a shred of evidence and would vaporize the Earth by definition. You can just count tree rings and know YEC is wrong, and YEC deflections about false rings ignores that rings are more likely to be missing all together and actual ages older. You can see Andromeda with your own eyes and be looking back further than YEC. That the world is ancient is trivially true.
So hold to whatever doctrine and proof text you wish, but if you contend that what can be plainly seen and measured is wrong, and insist that your made up world building is somehow the real science, then it is in the service of decency, honesty, and integrity that the falsehood of those claims should be exposed.
1 In the beginning, God created(said let there be) the heavens and the earth (and it was good) .
The assumptions in brackets is not what the bible says. It is what we assume in retrospect … It is a false assumption.
That is why I said earlier we are not pantheist. God is not divisible, He is an actual substantive infinity. His word cannot create anything that is not God himself. Therefore Gods silence is what creates the initial universe. The universe is a privation of God, not an extension of God. Said another way God first creates a nothing, an empty set, empty space/void, through which he can then form by word (the deluged earth/ crucified christ) into all things. Everything is not God in essence but this privation can be shaped in increasing Good by His word but never it attain God’s perfection. No created thing can or ever will be equal with Gods essence.
Woe to those who callevil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the LORD, who does all these things. (Isa 45:7)
In Isaiah 45 : 7 God forms light and peace but creates calamity/darkness. Forming is an application or proceeding of power similar to a potter and clay, a shaping of existing substances into form. As God is good, application of power causes good in reality, toward order, form, peace. In opposition, creating evil is related to a choice to abstain power causing disorder, darkness, and death. A good God cannot “form” evil, as his power only produces good. Therefore He creates it by privation by choice. God requires an object in which to choose to withdraw from. The object was Christs humanity on the cross. He became sin from which God withdrew and created the universe.
Strong defines “create = בָּרָא baw-raw’ A primitive root; (absolutely) to create; (qualified) to cut down (a wood), select, feed (as formative processes): - choose, create (creator), cut down, dispatch, do”. This “baw-raw” or create, is the same term in Genesis 1:1, “ in the beginning God “baw-raw” the heavens and the earth.” Isaiah 45 : 7 ties this baw-raw to the creation of calamity/darkness. So we see scripture supporting the presupposition that the baw-raw creation of the universe, thru privation caused darkness, chaos, and void. A privation of light creates darkness. A privation of order creates chaos. A privation of life creates death and desolation.
This is what Genesis tells us and John clarifies “He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him.” and rev 13:8 of the Lambslain from the foundation of the world.
Jon when we clearly see Christ in Genesis (death and resurrection) we don’t have to argue science anymore with anyone about this topic. We are free to proclaim the gospel in Genesis and let scientists examine rocks and fossils to God’s Glory. All things are made through Jesus, he is the common ancestor of ALL created things. Every particle was created through Jesus. Everything emanates from the Gospel of Jesus Christ, it is the center of all reality, it actually forms reality!
If you think I make to much of Christ I have accomplished my task!
33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
35 “Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”
36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.
Thank you for your thoughts and comments about my post. I will attempt to explain what I believe to be true with regard to precisely what you have written.
I have no reason to declare science anathema, nor do I have any reason to denounce perfectly accurate scientific instruments that I myself use. I do not have any problem whatsoever with scientific instruments or the scientific method performed in real operational science that is testable and repeatable in the present.
Setting up ‘Straw Men’ is a powerful way to destroy the credibility of those with whom you disagree. It does appear that you are doing precisely that, you’re making demonstrably false statements about what some Christians like me supposedly believe, and then you attempt to show it appears through a thinly veiled logical fallacy of an appeal to incredulity that my beliefs are plainly wrong, not valid and simply incorrect.
And here again, those tired old false accusations are venomously thrown at fellow Christians because they believe the Bible is God’s inerrant Word and was profoundly written by God inspired people in a manner that ensures the Genesis historical narratives of the creation and the global flood are clearly understood by all peoples to say precisely what they mean, that is that they are Real History. God is not limited in His ability to ensure that His message to mankind is clear and understood.
You make the accusation against me, and go to the effort of listing:
YEC just cannot leave science alone, ( PRECISELY WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO HERE? )
and every single time you dig down into the details, ( PRECISELY WHAT DETAILS? )
the misinformation, ( PRECISELY WHAT MISINFORMATION, HAVE I MADE HERE? )
selective fudging, ( PRECISELY WHAT SELECTIVE FUDGING, HAVE I MADE HERE? )
fabrication, ( PRECISELY WHAT FABRICATION, HAVE I MADE HERE? )
and misrepresentation surfaces. ( PRECISELY WHAT MISREPRESENTATION, HAVE I MADE HERE? )
BUT, you are clearly big on making false accusation but clearly do not support them with clear examples!
Thus, why should anyone take you seriously, aa anybody can throw around Straw Men and make False Accusations, but the onus of proof of the veracity of what you are claiming is true falls squarely upon you!
The paper at the following hyperlink, may explain some important consideration about the rapid speciation that occurred on Earth directly after the Global Flood. The fully referenced paper is a PDF at:
A short excerpt from the abovementioned paper is below, but to get the full story it is better to read the paper yourself.
“It is probable that speciation and variation took place before the Flood as well as after. It is also probable that some interbreeding or crossing occurred between newly descendant species as depicted in Figure 1. Such a speciation/variation process, in a drastically changed environment, would therefore account for most of the limited phenotypic differences between modern cat forms and fossil specimens. ‘Progressive’ evolution is therefore not the only explanation.
Diversification from created ancestral cats therefore could be just as effective in producing later cat types from the original created stock(s). This view is reinforced (not just in cats) by the knowledge that crosses are not infrequent between individuals at the subspecific, specific and generic levels,100 but are virtually unknown at the familial level.
Vorpahl recently published an interesting essay on adaptation which is pertinent.101 He points out that the likelihood of a species being successful without preadaptation is extremely small. In other words, environmental tracking is due to the genetic variability already present in the DNA waiting to be expressed at the right time. If organisms had to wait for the right mutation at the time it was needed to survive, most would be waiting forever! Vorpahl is correct when he states — ‘Preadaptation to the environment rather than adaptation would seem more consistent with survival . . .’.102
This fits in with created genetic variability potential, not with billions of lucky biological accidents. Under an evolutionary concept, it is stretching things to the limit to suggest that so many preadaptation’s could also arise in advance by chance.
A single pair of dog-kind animals, being the result of interbreeding and mixing before the Flood with the various descendants of the original created animals, could easily have possessed most of that original genetic information in their genes, and therefore were quite capable of producing the various later different types. There undoubtedly were cases of speciation due to geographical isolation and other factors, thus leading to such diverse forms as coyotes, domestic-type dogs, dingoes, wolves and so on.”
END OF EXCERPT FROM PAPER.
I think that you may benefit from reading some other related but less technical articles at:
I have been talking about the veracity of the Holy Scriptures and the fact that Genesis is about history, so I am honestly unclear about what you are saying here, but I get that you do not like Dr Nathaniel Jeanson.
After a little searching
You may find the flowing PDF article thought provoking and interesting:
Once again, I’ve been upholding the veracity of the Holy Scriptures that Genesis is about the history of the creation and flood that covered all of the Earth under Heaven; I have said nothing about Accelerated Nuclear Decay, and yet in your unwelcome rant, you throw it anyway, as yet another false accusation to add to the list of Straw Men it appears you wish to set up, about what you think my fellow Brother and Sister Christians and I believe; it is not wrong to trust and accept what Genesis ever so plainly teaches us all about creation, life, death and the Gospel of Salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Yes, dendrochronology is interesting, but it is certainly not definitive enough to make gross assumptions that each ring represents a year any more than the assumption that parallel fine layers in rock strata represent annual deposition rates and hence millions of years, when it has been repeatedly commonly observed that three layers do in the real world deposit simultaneously over only minutes where sediment laden water is pumped through flume tanks.
The global flood in the days of Noah would have had millions upon millions of topographically suitable locations across the planet where the lamina flow of such deposition of thousands of layers (now hardened to solid rock), took place.
You would do yourself a very great service if you read the informative article at:
An excerpt from that article is below that states the ACTUAL times of strata deposition:
“The photograph at left shows a person standing below a cliff near Mount St Helens. How old is the cliff? Look carefully at the picture, and you will see that there are three separate sections in the cliff. Would you believe that each of these sections was formed in one day? It may sound unbelievable, but it’s true! The lower part was formed on May 18, 1980; the centre part, which is 7.5 metres (25 feet) thick, was formed on June 12, 1980, and the darker part at the top on March 19, 1982.
If no one had seen this happen, it may have been thought that this cliff would have taken at least thousands of years to form, but we know it happened very quickly. Altogether, almost 200 metres (600 feet) of rocks have formed at Mount St Helens since 1980! This means that other rocks, which often seem very old, may have been formed quickly, too.”
END OF EXCERPT FROM ARTICLE … .
I certainly do not claim to have all the answers, I plainly don’t but nor does anyone, we are all in this together, and there are many, many unsolved mysteries, possible explanations that may be correct, but they may also be wrong, only time will tell, and perhaps for some questions we may never know the answers.
Just because you appear to assume a uniformitarian, ‘deep time,’ ‘naturalistic’ philosophy to interpret the data with regard to what you interpret as the light travel time from Andromeda, that I expect you believe is 2.5 million years, that doesn’t mean that you are correct, indeed distinguished physicist Dr John Hartnett has a hypothesis that the one way light travel time is instantaneous, i.e., it is immediate and yet remains in line with Einstein’s Special and General Relativity. Of course there may be another entirely different explanation. That article by Dr John Hartnett is titled “The Anisotropic Synchrony Convention model as a solution to the creationist starlight-travel-time problem” and can be downloaded as a PDF at:
Again, you would do yourself a very great service if you read the informative article at:
AND A LOT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS TOPIC IS AT:
But dear Ron, I do not, “what can be plainly seen and measured is wrong, and insist that your made up world building is somehow the real science ” that is yet another ‘Straw Man’ that you are again setting up.
The fossils, the rocks that we observe right now in the present can be tested, they can be analysed, and any number of hypothesis can be imagined to explain what we see, but in the end the analytical data can only ever be INTERPRETED within a worldview.
If the worldview through which you are interpreting the data is a uniformitarian, ‘deep time’ one that is based upon a ‘naturalistic’ philosophy, then you should not be surprised if the results that you obtain and the conclusions that you reach from them are in complete accord with the uniformitarian, ‘deep time’ one that is based upon a ‘naturalistic’ philosophy through which you interpreted the data.
If the worldview through which you are interpreting the data is based upon a Biblical worldview then the results that you obtain from the analysis and the conclusions that you come to will understandably be entirely different. That is simply a fact, it is NOT an opinion, it is a clear and unambiguous fact.
.
You state here,
Well, I beg to differ, that the shoe is firmly on the other foot, so to speak!
Christians who respect and faithfully trust what the Word of God, the Bible so clearly states in Genesis about:
the creation and Fall of Adam into Sin that brought Death into the creation,
the Global Flood judgement upon all nephesh chayyah life on Earth under Heaven
should not be ridiculed by other Christians and branded with an acronym and then denigrated as spreading falsehoods.
With regard to spreading ‘falsehoods’ it must be asked whydo you believe, that God commanded obedient, righteous Noah to laboriously build such an immense ship, and then have Noah, have to tolerate the abuse, ridicule and mocking of those people aligned not with God but the ‘world’, if there was merely a localflood?
Remember the photo I posted of the replica REAL life size ark, that has been built in Hong Kong at Post 501:
The author of Genesis inspired by God faithfully recorded the dimensions down to the nearest cubit!
There is no room for misinterpretation whatsoever!
At the risk of being a tad repetitive here, (though this is a matter of much importance), as I stated previously:
“The why an ark was needed at all, is the question you need to answer; ask yourself, if you truly imagine the flood that covered ‘all the land of the entire Earth under Heaven’ was merely a local flood.
A.) What area extent do you actually believe the ‘local’ flood’ covered at its widest point if you believe it was located somewhere in the region of present Iraq or Iran?
B.) Was it as big as 100 miles across, is that even realistic?
C.) So, why would they need to have an ark to save their lives and save the lives of the animals God brought to the ark, if all Noah had to do was travel for a week or two to higher ground and all God had to do was move the animals to higher ground in another area?
D.) The purpose of the flood was to obliterate all life from Earth, or LAND if you wish, it makes no difference. If all the life on land is to be drowned, WHY would God just use a ‘local flood’?”
The whole concept of just of a ‘local flood’ makes no sense at all!
As you clearly believe the ‘deep time’ evolution, local flood myth, please take the time to look at the photo here of the actual REAL SIZE of the ark, as faithfully provided us in Genesis, and then consider the monumental manual effort required way back then to first manually fell the trees, and manually cut the timber into boards, then manually haul the lumber to the ark construction site without machinery and then manually construct the ark to God’s clear specifications and only then, answer any or all of the above questions A, B, C, & D that I first put to Roymond, that still remain unanswered.
One thing i am really grateful for is that the ministry of this forum demonstrates that despite some.strong differences, the individuals here are some of the most wonderful people ive had the good fortune to talk to online.
I am really grateful to all of you for engaging with me…St Roymond, JPM, Ron, Kendel (particularly Kendel she graciously sent me some fabulous holiday snaps taken out in nature), Burrawang, Bill11, Christy…there are so many i want to acknowledge you all
It seems we have some major differences in our theological understanding, mainly about the interpretation of Genesis but there are probably also other disagreements.
Is death a totally bad thing? I would say that it is not, if we are talking about the end of this mortal life. Reproduction without death leads to catastrophic conditions. Without reproduction (+ death), there cannot be births and new life, at least not if we want to give to the new life decent living conditions.
When Genesis 1 speaks about the creation being good, it simply means ‘functioning as intended’. Death is part of a functioning ecosystem and therefore, death of animals can belong to the ‘good’ mentioned in Genesis 1. This is an interpretation about the text but I think it is a more credible interpretation than the interpretation that there were no death on earth before A & E screwed up in the paradise.
I do not believe that we are condemned because of the sin of Adam & Eve. We are condemned because of our own sin, not because of what our ancestors did. From that viewpoint, the sin of A & E is not an absolutely necessary part of the salvation plan.
I would say that the gospel is the gospel of the Kingdom of God. The word ‘euangelion’ (gospel, good news) is a word that was used in situations like when a kingdom won a fight, a kingdom got a king or a king was coming to a town. When Jesus started to spread the good news, his message was about the Kingdom of God. The ‘euangelion’ about the Kingdom of God includes what Jesus did but it also includes much more.
Yes, I understand the entire Bible is predominantly about God the Son, Who is the Creator, Who is Incarnate as Jesus the Christ, the Last Adam, the Saviour of mankind, the Lord of Lords and King of Kings, the Prince of Peace, the Beginning and the End, the Alpha and the Omega, the I AM!
The correct hermeneutic for interpreting the Holy Bible is exegesis that uses the Bible to interpret the Bible consistent with the blessed teachings of our Lord and Loving Saviour, Jesus.
The reality is Jesus regarded the Holy Scriptures as God’s sacred Word; that is, spoken directly by God or inspired by the Holy Spirit, and although written through the hands of men, was therefore, sacred to the degree that even the smallest letter or stroke of the pen was inspired and would “never pass away”
18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke of a letter shall pass from the Law, until all is accomplished!Matthew 5:18 NASB
Furthermore, it is an undeniable fact that Jesus referred to nearly every Old Testament book as authoritative and Genesis in particular as REAL HISTORY.
No amount of convoluted explanations, interpretations will change the TRUTH here.
Thus, there is without exception, categorically no excuse or reason to ever consider any part of the Holy Scriptures as being incomplete or lacking because it’s assumed the inspired human author was somehow less intelligent or lacking in understanding because they were a primitive nomad that was steeped in ancient near eastern pagan mythology and culture; Troy, please accept my apologies here but that hypothesis is in Truth clearly an abominably false teaching.
The writer of Genesis was a man who I believe was very likely far, far more intelligent than you or I, had more Godly wisdom than you or I, and as Jesus always had so much respect for, and put so much emphasis on, the accuracy and sanctity of the Holy Scriptures, it is clear the author faithfully recorded every last letter as our Omniscient and Gracious Lord God intended, so that all of humanity would be able to understand and know the Truth of how the creation came to be and why and by whose name we must be saved.
The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are FEW!
There is no sound reason why anyone should have any doubts about the Origin of the problems of Sin and Death in Genesis, because they are ever so clearly written in Genesis.
Read the text yourself, it is very clear.
Note that Satan first puts doubt in the mind of Eve about what God has said… Does that sound just a little familiar regarding Genesis?
3 Now the serpent was more cunning than any animal of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God really said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” 2 The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’” 4 The serpent said to the woman, “You certainly will not die! 5 For God knows that on the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will become like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took some of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves waist coverings.
8 Now they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden. 9 Then the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” 10 He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.” 11 And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree from which I commanded you not to eat?” 12 The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me some of the fruit of the tree, and I ate.” 13 Then the Lord God said to the woman, “What is this that you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” 14 Then the Lord God said to the serpent,
“Because you have done this,
Cursed are you more than all the livestock,
And more than any animal of the field;
On your belly you shall go,
And dust you shall eat
All the days of your life;
15 And I will make enemies
Of you and the woman,
And of your offspring and her Descendant;
He shall bruise you on the head,
And you shall bruise Him on the heel.”
16 To the woman He said,
“I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you shall deliver children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.”
17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’;
Cursed is the ground because of you;
With hard labour you shall eat from it
All the days of your life.
18 Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you;
Yet you shall eat the plants of the field;
19 By the sweat of your face
You shall eat bread,
Until you return to the ground,
Because from it you were taken;
For you are dust,
And to dust you shall return.”
20 Now the man named his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all the living. 21 And the Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.Genesis 3:1-21
Please also consider: Why do you think that God made garments for Adam and his wife if they were not real people?
Please Knor, why do you NOT understand that Death is not a normal condition, Death is an intruder that came about through rebellion against God’s clear command, that disobedience brought about ‘sin’ and the wages of ‘sin’ is DEATH.
Death is not good, death is not normal , it is only necessary because as Adam and Eve are REAL PEOPLE that rebelled against God, and as the Federal heads of humanity, Adam the first man and the Eve the mother of ALL the living, we are all born into a fallen cursed world, and we all need the salvation offered freely to us through the Love and Grace of our Creator the Lord Jesus. When a close family member dies, the grief, the loss, is not normal, we feel grief because we love the person who has died, we feel the injustice because death is not the way the creation was in the beginning.
12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—
13 To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law.
14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come.
15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
16 Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!
18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.
20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more,
21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Romans 5:12-21
Genesis ever so clearly tells us that sin came into the world through Adams rebellion against God by disobeying what God ever so clearly commanded. Understand that God is perfectly Just and Righteous, He is constant in eternity, and i for one am ever so grateful He is Good and Just and is Love, thus He cannot allow disobedient rebelliousness, the Just wages of sin is Death, just as God warned Adam about the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Yes there was and is a literal tree, marvel not, for greater mysteries than this are revealed by the miracles of Jesus during His Earthly ministry.
Remember, when Jesus commanded the wind and the waves for example:
37 And a fierce gale of wind developed, and the waves were breaking over the boat so much that the boat was already filling with water. 38 And yet Jesus Himself was in the stern, asleep on the cushion; and they woke Him and *said to Him, “Teacher, do You not care that we are perishing?” 39 And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, “Hush, be still.” And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm. 40 And He said to them, “Why are you afraid? Do you still have no faith?” 41 They became very much afraid and said to one another,“Who, then, is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?” . . . Mark 4:37-41
Well I believe that When Genesis 1 speaks about the creation being good and very good it is simply because it was very good, that is, there was NO DEATH nor sorrow or pain, no tears, no suffering, it was very good just as our Loving God had made it.
Our Creator is not incompetent, when God saw that it was GOOD, you can trust with your life that it was GOOD and did NOT include DEATH. . . . Death is the Last Enemy!
Well yes, at the moment, death is a part of all functioning ecosystems in a fallen creation but it wasn’t always this way. And in the new Heaven and new Earth, it will be as it once was again, except when that happens there will be no more sorrow, every tear shall be wiped away, there will be no more DEATH! It will be as God originally made the creation before the fall, but it will be permanent, for ever and ever, AMEN!
Well, again we are all condemned because we are evil through and through, every one of us including myself and we are ALL in need of salvation through our Loving and Gracious Lord and Saviour Jesus.
Read the texts for yourself at Genesis 3:1-21 and Romans 5:12-21 it is very, very clear what the Truth is and then pray the Lord gives you wisdom and understanding, and you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.
The Gospel is first about the Salvation offered by Jesus to allow us to be washed by His blood that He willingly shed on the cross for our sins so that we can be made blameless before God through an act of our faith from our own will, through which we are able to enter the Kingdom of God that Jesus tells us about in many different parables in the New Testament.
Experimental and observational science are at the basis of all generalizations of science. Because of this for example, we can predict the triple point of water at any location with confidence. This also applies to time. Could it be different at another time in history? Sure, but one would need detailed rational and compelling evidence as to why the general principles obtained through observational science are superceded. In other words, you need some sort of observation that overrides all the prior observations.
YEC literature often accuses its critics of not understanding the difference between operational and historical science, but they are being disingenuous. They talk about interpreting the same facts, but given that they reject the application of observational science to the past, what is the basis for interpretation? If not observational science, then what science is involved at all? Where is any lab support for accelerated nuclear decay whatsoever? It ceases to be any sort of science, neither observational nor historical, and so enters the nether realm of pseudoscience.
Face it, almost all your citations and referenced articles are from AiG, ICR, CMI, and a few other creationist organizations that have sworn to a preordained conclusion. There is no interest in following the evidence where it leads. Misinformation? Intrinsic C14 in diamonds, macroscopic soft tissue from dinosaurs, continental crossing tsunami’s, mitochondrial and Y-chromosome support for human diversity, deliberated sabotaged dating stunts and the RATE project, which is continuously referenced by YEC. Rejection of radiometric and other dating techniques is core to every YEC organization and is no straw man.
