- So you think Jesus, Lord of All, by whom Creation was made, who is not incompetent, and who is capable of all things, created a dome over a flat earth and poured the waters of the flood through “windows” in the dome.
- Hello, …hello!! Earth to Burrawang! You need to return immediately, … if you can.
1 Like
Given that ID has never been able to provide a rigorous and consistent definition of specified complexity, this is like asking, are you really saying that you can nominate actual examples of an increase of pixie dust of the type needed in the sense of microbes to man evolution by Natural Selection.
You have not provided any example of a trait which is beyond the reach of biology. Standard evolutionary theory accounts for biological complexity. Specified complexity as used in ID is yet another useless attempt at design detection.
The YEC notion of Biblical kinds is neither Biblical nor scientific.
2 Likes
That’s exactly how I felt after consuming material from Creation Ministries International for years.
I was also thankful that God helped me to be aware of the truth when all those other scientists and evolutionists were the ignorant ones.
I probably even said something like this while thinking it was true. There have been an incredible number of predictions and fossils that have been found within the framework of common ancestry. There are also fossil genes, sometimes called pseudogenes that are remnants of functionality that species would have had long ago in the past. A cool example is how based upon the fossil record you could predict that all mammals had insect eating ancestors. And then you could look for remnants of jeans that are involved in digesting insect exoskeletons. Here’s a blog article summarizing some pretty cool evidence.
I do find it a little bit sad that after half a decade of consuming CMI material almost exclusively, I had no idea the really cool things we found about God’s creation. In retrospect, the amount of basic information I had no idea existed, after this period of my life, was shocking. There’s a whole amazing world of creation to explore, but CMI will never tell you about it. Why?
4 Likes
Hi Matthew,
I have been consuming profound Truth from our Lord for about six decades through reading the Word of Truth, the Holy Bible.
I am grateful that our Lord is Holy and Righteous and perfectly Just and that He is right now holding all of the creation in existence, without Him, the entire universe, all of creation would not exist! He has ensured we have oxygen to breathe, food to eat, and the Earth has a magnetic field that protects us from deadly radiation emanating from the sun.
But Matthew, blaming any website such as CMI for any lack of knowledge that you have is hardly reasonable or fair.
If CMI hasn’t covered an issue anywhere on their website or in their publications, I strongly suggest to you that it is likely because those issues are known to be based upon false premises or false beliefs that are contrary to the Holy Scriptures. I honestly cannot think of any issues that haven’t been adequately addressed by CMI at some time or other as a thorough search of the CMI website will readily verify. Barring of course, any new emerging discoveries that have occurred in very recent times of the preceding six months or so.
I have researched many of the Biblical origins issues over more than four decades from a broad range of literature sources across the spectrum from Christian to secular to atheist and have always found the Biblical and Scientific reporting standards of Creation Ministries International are meticulously honest, accurate and consistent with the Holy Scriptures in both Testaments.
For example, the Instructions to Authors for the Journal of Creation are:
JOURNAL OF CREATION is dedicated to upholding the authority of the 66 books of the Bible, especially in the area of origins. All our editors adhere to the Creation Ministries International (CMI) Statement of Faith and most papers will be designed to support this. Rarely, other papers may be accepted for publication on merit so that certain issues can be clarified. The views expressed in the papers are those of the authors and not necessarily those of CMI.
Because the scope of this journal is broad, we welcome articles on any topic that is relevant to biblical creation. This includes the sciences such as geology, chemistry, biology, astronomy, etc., and also archaeology, theology, hermeneutics, biblical history, geography, linguistics, ethics and society, philosophy, law, etc. Potential authors should familiarise themselves with the journal and its position and style before submitting articles. Authors should also indicate if their manuscript has been submitted elsewhere, address previous articles on the topic, and ensure the work of others is properly acknowledged.
Word length: Shorter articles are more likely to be read so preference will be given to publishing them. All articles, including letters, may be edited for brevity and clarity. Perspectives: 1,000–2,000 words; Book reviews: 1,500–3,000 words, but please enquire first. You may be asked to scan the cover of the book; Letters to the editor: 1,000 words. We will publish critical letters on articles already published, but a reply will usually follow the criticism; Papers, Overviews, Countering the Critics, Viewpoints and Essays: <5,000 words.
Articles must be written clearly and concisely and should be focused on only one topic/subject. The most readable articles are those with an average sentence length of about 17 words, with one idea per sentence. Do not use too many big or extra words such as “in spite of the fact that” when “although” would do. Please use first person sparingly and do not use “this present writer”, which is verbose false modesty and ambiguous. Care with spelling is crucial, and British spelling generally applies. Personal invective or similar comments against others are not acceptable.
Specialist technical terms and abbreviations should be defined the first time they are used. If many technical terms are used, these should be included in a glossary. SI units should be used in scientific papers. Words in non-Latin alphabets (e.g. Hebrew, Greek and Russian) must use Unicode characters and be accompanied by a transliteration, also in Unicode characters (Unicode should avoid errors when the file is transferred to a publishing program or HTML).
Abstract: All articles except Perspectives, Letters and Book Reviews should be preceded by an Abstract, which should not exceed 200 words and must be without abbreviations and reference citations. The Abstract should summarise the key points of the paper and be comprehensible to readers before they have read the paper.
References should be indicated in the main text by superscript numbers in sequence and then listed in numerical order at the end of the text (End Notes). Full details of all references are required, including all authors and their initials, the full title of the paper or book, the full title of the journal or its accepted abbreviation, the volume number, the page number(s), the editor(s) of the book or proceedings (if applicable), the publishers and place of publication (in the case of a book), and the year of publication. If a citation is repeated, then the same superscript number should be used (a cross reference).
Quotes must be verbatim, with omissions clearly shown by ellipsis ( … ).
Even erroneous grammar and spelling in the original must be reproduced, and indicated by [sic]. Any additions or explanations within a quote need to be placed in square brackets . Primary sources are preferred, but if a secondary source must be used, the reference format must be [primary source], as cited in [secondary source]. For internet URLs the date last downloaded should be included
Tables should be embedded in a Microsoft Word document, with brief, self-explanatory titles, and captions if an explanation is essential to understanding the table. Tables should be numbered according to their sequence in the text and all should be referred to in the text, e.g. (see table 1).
Graphics should be supplied electronically on CD or by email to journal@ creation.info as 300dpi *.TIF, *.EPS, *.PSD, *.AI, *.JPG, *.PDF or *.BMP files, not embedded into a document file. They can be sent in colour or greyscale, but will appear only in greyscale in the journal. Graphics should have a minimum size of 80 mm x 80 mm when printed (preferably 1024 x 768 pixels). Photographs are acceptable provided they have good contrast and intensity, and are submitted as sharp, glossy copies or as 35 mm slides.
Computer print-outs are not acceptable.
Figures should be numbered according to their sequence in the text.
References should be made in the text to each figure. In planning images and figures, the page format and column widths of the journal should be kept in mind and should allow for the possibility of reduction. Each illustration should have a self-explanatory caption. The captions should be collected together at the end of the article document file. If graphics are not provided with a manuscript, authors may be asked to submit suggestions and possible sources of non-restricted material.
Copyright ownership for each and every graphic must be specified and any relevant permissions and or credit requirements given in writing. If you are not the copyright owner, please supply written permission (preferably with an original signature) from the copyright owner. If you are the copyright owner, your submission of a graphic will be taken to grant us permission to use the image in the journal and also any other publications or on our website, unless you specify otherwise.
Biography: Papers, Overviews, Countering the Critics, Forums, Viewpoints, Research Notes and Essays should include a biography of no more than 100 words for each author. It should include the authors’ qualifications and experience, and involvement in creationist work.
Thus Matthew, in all honesty, I cannot accept the spurious and derogatory claims that many make on this website against devoted Christians who are spending their lives to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus and the trustworthiness of the Holy Bible to mean precisely what is written.
and in every issue of Creation Magazine you should remember that this is published:
Creation Ministries International seeks to give glory and honour to the triune God of the Bible as Creator. In particular, we affirm the truth of the biblical record of the real origin and history of the world and mankind.
Part of this real history is the bad news that the rebellion of the first man, Adam, against God’s command, brought death, suffering, and separation from God into this world. We see the results all around us. All of Adam’s descendants are sinful from conception (Psalm 51:5) and have themselves entered into this rebellion (sin). They therefore cannot live with a holy God but are condemned to separation from God. The Bible says that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). The consequence: all are therefore subject to “the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His might” (2 Thessalonians 1:9).
But the good news is that God has done something about it. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).
Jesus Christ the Creator, God the Son, though totally sinless, took on human nature, so He could become our Redeemer.
Then He suffered, on behalf of mankind, the penalty of mankind’s sin, which is death and separation from God. He did this to satisfy the righteous demands of the holiness and justice of God, His Father. Jesus was the perfect sacrifice; He died on a cross, but on the third day, He rose again, conquering death, so that all who truly believe in Him, repent of their sin (repentance = a change of mind), and trust in Him (rather than their own merit), can come back to God and live for eternity with their Creator.
Therefore: “Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God” (John 3:18).
What a wonderful Saviour—and what a wonderful salvation in Christ our Creator!
If you want to know more of what the Bible says about how you can receive eternal life, please email, write, or call the office near you … see p. 2 [of this magazine]
For more: Good news.
Thus, once again Matthew, I sincerely hope you understand that Creation Ministries International (CMI) is a body of strong Christians doing all they can to bring people to an understanding of the Truth about the human condition and our absolute need to be saved by the only Living God, who is Jesus Christ our Saviour.
The picture you paint about CMI is just so bleak, plain incorrect and unfounded, I worry about what has so drastically changed your core beliefs so much about the Bible and creation and the age of the creation, (Earth time) etc…
Also, you may not have considered another salient fact about Creation Ministries International (CMI) which is that CMI does not receive any government funding for research. The Lord has blessed and provided this important ministry around the world and provided the necessary funding from donations by our brothers and sisters in the Lord and through publishing magazines, journals, books and multi-media to spread the Good News of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and exposing such stumbling blocks to faith in the authenticity of the Holy Bible, that belief in compromising false teachings as ‘evolution’ and ‘deep time’ and others present. Thus there may not be the financial ability at any particular time for CMI to cover every facet of this debate. Research is undertaken when the necessary funding is available. It is a credit to the many scientists who give freely of their time and skills for the glory of our Lord and the propagation of the Truth found in the Holy Bible.
My conscience is clear with regard to publications I have posted on this site, I have done so always in good faith, and with the Hope of providing some balance on this particular very one sided website that is clearly in support of belief in evolution and billions of years, that contradicts the clear and straightforward historical creation account recorded for our benefit and edification in the Holy Scriptures.
I wish you well!
God Bless you Matthew,
jon
I’ll let you be the judge of whether Biblical kinds are Biblical;
I suggest you take a long hard look at the Holy Scripture here at verses 21-25 inclusive below:
1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
12 And 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.
13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Genesis 1 KJV
God bless,
jon
If you did not read the link I provided to the forum thread on Biblical kinds, and respond to that conversation, then I cannot be bothered to discuss it with you.
1 Like
What we are saying is that complex specified information isn’t scientific in any meaningful way. It’s just empty rhetoric. Time after time, ID/creationists refuse to show how we can quantify the information in any given DNA sequence in any meaningful biological sense. IOW, they have no scientific and quantifiable way of determining if information has changed. “Evolution can’t produce new information” is just an empty slogan.
If you think I am wrong, compare the human and chimp genomes. Find the differences. Of those differences, demonstrate which of those differences represent a quantifiable change in information content, and then also explain why known processes of mutation could not produces those differences.
We could start with the transitional fossils you are ignoring:
In fact, check out all 29 pieces of evidence at that website, evidence you claim doesn’t exist.
If you claim there is no evidence for evolution then you are ignoring the scientific evidence.
5 Likes
That’s a convenient way to ignore actual data that contradicts the young earth creationist paradigm. “We don’t talk about that because it contradicts our scientific preconceptions. God said so after all!”
That’s the problem I’m talking about! I hate to say this bluntly, but you don’t actually have the relevant expertise and knowledge to evaluate where CMI is lacking severely. And you will never get that expertise by reading CMI who hides lots of true and wonderful information about God’s creation from it’s readers. “Because we know its not true” - that’s a lazy excuse to ignore contradictory evidence.
There are two possibilities here:
- All science agencies and private companies who make money off STEM topics just hate young earth creationism, a niche interpretive framework of the Bible.
- YEC science writing is… actually of very low quality. The articles in their private journals are actually so poor that nobody would ever bother funding their science. For example, those rich billion dollar oil companies… they don’t use Flood Geology to make money.
Now of course, the reality I am proposing is #2 and that is not an option that I think any YEC would actually even consider because it would require admitting that they’ve been fooled by laughably bad science writing parading as actual research.
Well, are you open to it at this point to possibly be wrong? Or is your mind completely made up and thus further discourse here is meaningless?
Yes I know that it is. I’m telling you I, after exclusively consuming YEC material, was using YEC arguments in evangelism and sharing it with my Bible studies in good faith and with a clear conscience. However, I was wrong.
I hate to break it to you, but there have been hundreds of like-minded YEC who come in, and repeat the same arguments over and over again. They don’t realize that hundreds have come before them, repeating the same young earth creationists talking points. Your arguments are nothing new, the way you talk has been seen many times before, and your zeal, while noble, I think is misguided.
In other words, it’s not like people here haven’t heard the same old arguments a dozen times, both about science topics and about reading Scripture. Many people here are also former YECs who have much more combined experience with the topics than many lifetimes. Some people here actually do the science which YECs claim are wrong and patiently try to explain with people like yourself who again, make the same old arguments.
6 Likes
Dear Ron,
well that is a convenient way of avoiding the clear words of Scripture in Genesis 1 that state the word “kind” seven times.
If you think that isn’t Biblical, that is your prerogative, however I differ; the concept of Biblical kind is directly from the Bible, nowhere else, yet the concept of evolution is certainly a man made construction that is forced upon the Scriptures, yet is NOT mentioned anywhere in the Holy Scriptures.
It is NOT I that making any special pleading to admit any concept alien to the Bible.
God bless,
jon
The same could be said about almost every theory in modern science. In multiple places in the Bible it says the Earth does not move, and yet our modern understanding has the Earth moving about its axis and moving about the Sun in an elliptical orbit. Are you a Geocentrist? Do you reject the non-biblical Heliocentrism?
“But to want to affirm that the Sun, in very truth, is at the centre of the universe and only rotates on its axis without traveling from east to west, and that the Earth is situated in the third sphere and revolves very swiftly around the Sun, is a very dangerous attitude and one calculated not only to arouse all Scholastic philosophers and theologians but also to injure our holy faith by contradicting the Scriptures….”
–Cardinal Bellarmine, 1615
2 Likes
Dear Matthew,
no it is the Truth!
For you to say, ““We don’t talk about that because it contradicts our scientific preconceptions. God said so after all!”” is utterly preposterous, and unfortunately, making claims like that about honest Christians is deplorable, dishonest, and shameful.
The science conducted by CMI is rigorous and thorough, the conclusions drawn from research are not restricted in any way, they are determined from the data wherever that leads.
But Matthew, how in the world do you know what expertise and knowledge I have?
Utter nonsense!
Oh yes, you believe that simply because I trust the Bible and honest Christian researchers from CMI, I am unqualified, without expertise and lack knowledge, ‘very convenient’, to use your own words.
You make the claim here that CMI “hides lots of true and wonderful information about God’s creation from it’s readers”, but once again as with others on this site, that is a very big claim, but without a skerrick of actual example, another derogatory generalisation without merit!
Making false accusations about CMI is about as low as it gets, and there appear to be many on this site prepared to go there. It is sad that professing Christians are doing this injustice to their brethren in the Lord.
More utter nonsense. Really Matthew, why are you so jaded in your view of CMI.
Mainstream journals such as The Lancet, Science, Nature and Scientific American etc. reject papers from Christians who believe the plain Truth of the Bible’s clear message of creation in seven days and a catastrophic Global flood that reshaped the planet simply because the ‘Prime Paradigm’ the ‘Sacred Cow’ of evolution is being blasphemed. Make no mistake, evolution is a religious conviction that has such a vice grip on its adherents that it will stop at nothing to prevent the Truth of the Holy Scriptures from being known, and that is precisely what is occurring here, whether you realise it or not, that is what is occurring.
“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it." Matthew 7:13
I may ask you the very same question, “are you open to it at this point to possibly be wrong? Or is your mind completely made up and thus further discourse here is meaningless?”
But I am open to the Truth, and the Truth shines clear and bright; I am reminded here of
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Romans 1:18-21
What makes you so sure you aren’t wrong now, and in fact were correct originally, but have been swayed by both the 'world’ and the incessant persuading arguments that support an interpretation of the the Holy Scriptures that is the precise opposite of the Truth.
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’?” Genesis 3:1
Do not worry about me Matthew, you are not breaking anything new to me, I am more than aware that many fine Christians have gone in to battle for the Truth with the full armour of God on this website, and have been treated just as I have been treated.
They have done so as I have done in the hope that some of you will come to see the fatal flaws in holding to belief in a man made construct founded in naturalism and atheism that goes by the name of evolution and its necessary corollary ‘deep time’.
You may not realise it, but in fact my journey is the same although the direction is the opposite of yours.
I do have science training and as such, I did believe evolution and ‘deep time’ to be real and established fact. And for many years as a Christian, I thought and spoke about evolution as being the method that God used to create, it all seemed so obvious and neat.
The fossil evidence was there, the stratigraphic progression appeared real to me, (if I didn’t look too hard around the world, and kept my mind rigidly trained on the prime paradigm of evolution and 'deep time’).
I was a spirit filled born again Christian who completely believed in evolution and deep time.
But I was wrong!
The Lord graciously opened my eyes to the Truth, and once opened I could never unsee the palpable reality of Romans 1:20.
Everywhere I look now around the planet, I see Gods creative hand in all that has been MADE by Him. I see stark evidence for the GLOBAL flood of Noah, so obvious that I was at first incredulous that I was unable to see it, whilst I was still utterly blinded by my evolution preconceptions.
All I can do now is proclaim that Jesus is Lord of All, and hope and pray and be completely open and honest in communicating to the very best of my ability in clear terms understandable by everyone, that evolution is a False Teaching that is blinding many, just as it blinded me for so many years.
God bless you Matthew,
jon
Yes.
If you read my link you would see I specifically discuss Biblical kinds, but typical of what I have come to expect from creationists, you avoid the actual argument raised and just regurgitate the YEC SOSO.
But the plain and simple concept of Biblical kinds found in the Bible is in conflict with the YEC concept of Biblical kinds.
3 Likes
Creationist organizations flat out state that they reject evidence if it contradicts their interpretation of scripture.
“No apparent, perceived, or claimed evidence in any field of study, including science, history, and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture obtained by historical-grammatical interpretation.”
–Answers in Genesis
How has CMI interpreted this data?
If you think there are no transitional fossils based on what you have read at CMI then you have had the wool pulled over your eyes.
Their claims are rejected because they are contradicted by scientific evidence.
3 Likes
More specifically, their claims are rejected because they do not obey the rules of science.
And no, @Burrawang, I am not talking about “naturalism” or “secularism.” I am talking about the basic rules and principles of accurate and honest measurement, logical consistency, and quality control. Rules that are the same for Christians and atheists alike. Rules that are the same whether miracles happen or not. Rules that are the same whether God intervened in the process of creation or not. Rules that apply to “operational science” and “historical science” alike.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Science has rules and honesty has rules. If young earthists don’t want to be told that they’re being dishonest, or that their “science” is a joke, they need to make sure that they are sticking to the rules. And that means actually sticking to them, not just claiming that they’re sticking to them and throwing a hissy fit and crying “persecution” whenever anyone points out that they aren’t.
3 Likes
Dear Ron,
Yes, I did read your treatise at the link, however the reason is far simpler than you seem to think.
It would appear you have not considered that the straightforward, honest, plain and clear reading of Genesis, describes:
1.) God bringing two of every kind of animal in whose nostrils is the breathe of life and some clean animals in slightly greater numbers,
2.) The flood covered the entire Earth, 15 cubits over the highest mountains that blotted out all ‘nephesh chayyah’ life on Earth.
It is therefore not a creationist construct, but rather, given the clear Scriptural reality of 1 and 2 above that are directly from the Bible as it would have been understood when written and throughout Church history, and don’t forget, confirmed as history as affirmed by Jesus Himself in the Gospels, all the biodiversity we see today in the animal kingdom of ‘nephesh chayyah’ creatures have logically descended from the only animals left alive on Earth,i.e., those breeding pairs that were on the ark.
Therefore, the concept of ‘kinds’ that repopulated the Earth after the catastrophic global flood is precisely what the Bible tells us, again, it is not a made up idea from creationists.
God bless,
jon
This paper by Dr. Philip Senter, professor of zoology, nicely lays out the self contradictions of flood geology.
The Defeat of Flood Geology by Flood Geology
Geologist Dr. Lorence G Collins, a Christian, contributed the following survey…
Twenty-one Reasons Noah’s Worldwide Flood Never Happened
and…
More Geological Reasons noah’s Flood Did not Happen
This by engineer and physicist Alan Hayward…
2 Likes
Then by science and the straightforward, honest, plain and clear reading of Genesis, all that biodiversity, representing hundreds of thousands of animals, had to be on the ark 4500 ya.
2 Likes
Dear T aquaticus,
You appear to hold science above Scripture. I do not.
Science is not fixed, it is constantly changing, correcting itself when errors are found, it is not and never can be absolute, whereas, the Holy Scriptures are fixed, are constant and are Truth.
5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 6 And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.
7 You are judging by appearances. If anyone is confident that they belong to Christ, they should consider again that we belong to Christ just as much as they do. . . . 2 Corinthians 10:5-7
God bless,
jon
So then it is exactly true that, ““We don’t talk about that because it contradicts our scientific preconceptions. God said so after all!””
1 Like
Dear Ron,
Absolutely not, why would you think that all the biodiversity we observe today was on the ark?
Isn’t it a fact that both creationists and evolutionist recognise that new species are arising as environmental niches favour some individuals in a population over others?
There is no reason I can think of why this same process of rapid speciation hasn’t been occurring since the animals walked, flew, slithered and crawled off the ark those thousands of years ago.
Thus the massive diversity we see today would be far greater than the numbers of creatures that boarded the ark.
Of course, the variations that gave rise to the different varieties of creatures (as defined by taxonomic conventions today) is always limited to reproduction as the Bible clearly tells us “after their kind”.
From a purely Biblical perspective, many Genus level creatures are actually the same kind, that is, they are not really as different as the current taxonomic classification system would have us think, as many different recently classified species of the same ‘kind’ can breed and many can produce fertile offspring.
Thus the numbers of creatures on the ark would logically have been far less in numeric terms than the number of species classified today.
However in terms of genetic information, the creatures that boarded the ark were of course from the pre flood world, therefore they did not suffer themselves genetically from the genetic bottleneck that was a direct result of the Global flood.
Therefore, the genetic information they carried in each of their genomes would have been far greater than what is in individuals today, and it would have had far less damage, that is incessantly accumulating in all genomes over time.
The original animals that came off the ark were ALL chosen by God to be the breeding pairs to repopulate the Globe with their ‘kind’.
The fact that we have made an arbitrary classification using a binomial system to denote a specie in no way invalidates the very real existence of Biblical kinds.
God bless,
jon