CMI article image.
Posted on 04/12/2016 7:52:06 AM PDT by fishtank
Yet another old-earther accuses a creationist of believing in evolution
by Nick Sabato
Published: 12 April 2016 (GMT+10)
On a 28 March 2016 blog post, Professor Ken Keathley made the allegation that Ken Ham now embraces evolution. He bases this unfounded assertion on a recent article where Ham discusses how the diversity of species present today can be traced back to their respective “kinds” represented on the Ark. For Keathley, it is “big news” that a prominent creationist “has embraced macro-evolution.” However, as will be seen, creationists in general embraced speciation for decades; it is not just a property of evolutionists.
First, the article in question has done no such thing, and secondly, variation within a kind is not “big news”, nor is it “macro-evolution”.
The same day that this fallacious post appeared, CMI’s Calvin Smith (and others) rebutted Keathley’s assertions in the comments section and pointed out his equivocation of speciation and evolution. And they further pointed out that his ‘micro-macro’ distinction is an example of ‘Arguments we think creationists should not use’, because the issue is not size of change but direction (informationally uphill or downhill).
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
CMI article image.
Just a reminder....
Ole earth / new earth .... neither get in the way of my faith. There’s no denying Jesus.
where Ham discusses how the diversity of species present today can be traced back to their respective “kinds” represented on the Ark
Makes perfect sense and doesn't conflict with Scripture.
I'm fine with anyone disagreeing and preferring their own opinion.
I find it interesting that some of the people who reject the possibility of evolution happening over 100’s of millions or even billions of years have no trouble with it all happening since The Flood.
I consider the diversity of species to just be natural selection and not evolution. No big deal.
Except Jesus who said Take ye heed, behold I have foretold you all things... That would include 'old earth vs. new earth... Think Jesus did not know the evolution/creation controversy would not be used against Him? What is never discussed by either side is when did God create all 'souls/spirit intellect'....?
Evolution, changing of an organism to something new, is not true. Adaptation is.
You can breed dogs all day long, get LOTS of different forms....of dogs.
Get back to me when you get a Non-Dog.
In other news there was an ant on the sidewalk
What happened to all the dog fossils ...
The model that Ham proposes for species diversity is widely criticized beyond Ross and others. However, that is not my problem with Ham. My problem is that he states people who do not hold to six literal day creation are not Christians. There is hardly a creditable theologian of philosopher who holds this view. Ham would also have to extend this argument to Church fathers.
Agreed. And He said this:
Mat 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mat 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
There’s also this:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Eph 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Rom 1:20 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:
Rom 1:21 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.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
In addition, the last book of the Bible says this:
Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
Rev 10:5 And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven,
Rev 10:6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:
Rev 14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
The point, of course, is creation is undeniably scattered throughout Scripture and not just in Genesis. This isn’t even all of it. So those who deny it must deny much of God’s Word. I think a lot of Christians are ignorant of non-Genesis Scripture that declares creation.
Genesis 1 itself is unmistakable. Whenever “yom” (day) is used with an ordinal number (first, second) in Hebrew, it ALWAYS means a calendar day. Whenever “yom” is used with “evening and the morning” it ALWAYS means a calendar day. In this case Moses was commanded to use both, to eliminate any question.
There’s a profound difference in operational science and historical science. The former can be reproduced. The latter happened once and is pure speculation and conjecture. The idea of throwing lifeless chemicals together and life springing from it through natural processes is laughable. Even the most “simple” single-celled organism is far too stupendously complex for any such thing to EVER happen. So evolutionists can’t create life. And their theoretical means of going from that “simple” life form they can’t create to more complexity, mutation, only shows itself to make an organism less complex or completely unviable. Thousands of generations of fruit flies have been experimentally irradiated, and even though some of them look freaky, they’re all still fruit flies. Not one of them mutated into anything else but a freaky fruit fly.
What I’m saying is there’s no reason to compromise God’s Word. Science isn’t the new religious caste that has all the answers. Evolution is much like climate change in that they believe their “nonbelievers” must be punished.
Evolutionists reject a priori any hint of the supernatural. But the supernatural is really the only explanation for even that most “simple” single-celled organism. Disagree? Throw lifeless chemicals together and create life and prove creationists wrong. This proves, of course, that evolution is every bit as much faith-based as creation. Not intended for you specifically, but just a general statement.
At a deeper level, evolution is a direct attack on the Bible, God’s Word. God’s right to either eternally reward us or eternally punish us flows from the fact that He created us and therefore owns us and can do with us as He wishes. And God is being robbed of glory He alone deserves as our Creator when we profess belief in “goo to you through the zoo.” See Romans 1:20-22 above.
Yes, I am tired of people who take a minor detail - adding the genealogies in Genesis and extrapolating the age of the earth - and somehow this is a salvation issue. You know most of them would mock any reference to the Church Fathers.
I consider the diversity of species to just be natural selection and not evolution. No big deal.
—
I agree. There should be far transitional fossils to support evolution. The evidence just isn’t there.
Do you believe that sin preceded death, as the Scriptures teach? Or that humanity developed out of cycles of life and death, as evolution teaches? It’s kinda significant.
Great post!
There is not a credible historian alive that would deny Jesus walked this earth. I have no doubts Jesus did. I also believe he was crucified, was dead for three days, and was resurrected. It was the price he paid for our sins.
Old earth / Young earth? I can beat my head against the wall but I don’t know for certain in this life-time. And truth is that I have limited time to really study it.
The age of the earth is not a salvation issue, in that we are agreed. However, if you doubt Genesis, how can you believe Jesus, the man, created all things? Or that he rose from the dead after 3 days?
Which other parts of the scripture do you think are "minor detail". Are you suggesting that the genealogies written should be ignored as irrelevant or incorrect? If you ever added them up yourself, and read the scripture exogetically, not eisogetically, you would come to the same conclusion re the age of the earth. You may then dismiss that conclusion based on "science so called". Perhaps you dismiss 1 Timothy 6:19-21 as a minor detail, and no warning at all?
Biblical genealogies could be accurate and there could still be an Old Earth. According to some Torah scholars, the first seven days of Creation are not counted in the number of Judaic years (currently 5776). This leads to a possibility that the “days” of the Creation are more like eras, particularly when you consider that the sun didn’t appear until several days into the process.
http://www.geraldschroeder.com/AgeUniverse.aspx
Also, this leads to the possibility that the Biblical Adam was not the first Homo sapiens, but instead was the first one with a soul.
http://geraldschroeder.com/wordpress/?page_id=79#h5
Throw lifeless chemicals together and create life and prove creationists wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.