KINDS and ADAPTATION

[Donray]

EarthScienceguy wrote:

I believe in adaptation not evolution. Adaptation says that organisms change because of heredity not mutations.

God created kinds of animals. So yes He only created one species of humans.


In another topic when I asked EarthScienceguy what he believed instead of evolution he wrote back the above. I asked him several times to explin his theory and he incapable of explanation and debate of his theory.
I would like to find from any Christians that believes like EarthScienceguy something about this belief and some proof using known fossils and how these fit in.
How do you explain Homo neanderthalensis (the Neanderthal) and The Denisovans that both had sex with modern humans? If you are from Europe for your background you have some Neanderthal DNA.

Since this theory uses “kinds of animals� that a lot of creationist do could someone list all the kinds that were on the ark and then the list of animals, insects, bacteria, etc that these kinds adapted into. Are you with a lot of the undereducated people that think the world is less then 10K years old?

What is adaptation and not evolution? Does it have anything to due with DNA changing? Could someone point out all the articles that support this theory? I would hope that there is a list of science articles that shows your science of adaptation of kinds on the ARK to all the diversity we have.

I would like to have a debate on this theory since Christians like to debate evolution we should have this debate also.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 85 by Danmark]

None of these say that the Earth is flat. Isaiah 40 talks about the Earth being a circle in which a sphere is.

Really? So explain the four corners Revelation talks about. Is the Earth a cube?
How could the devil show him the entire Earth from a high mountain if the Earth is a sphere?
Why does the Earth have a "foundation" if it is a sphere?

These verses only make sense if the Earth is flat.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 88 by Danmark]

Of course you don't, "Science Guy." And maybe the entire band is out of step with you. Why cite anything at all from science, since you don't believe in it?

Modern science and the scientific method was developed out of Christianity. Bacon was a Christian wanting to know more about the character of God. He knew that Romans 1 said "19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse"

This was the focus of Science up until the enlightenment period. Now just because some have veered off the original intent of science is of no concern to me.

Maybe you should change your name to "EarthBibleguy."
Why use the word "primate" at all, since it's from that 'science stuff.'

Maybe I will.

I do not have a problem with the word primate except when it is associated with man.

BTW, how old IS the Earth, EarthBibleguy? According to the begats in Genesis it's about 6023 years old.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/hi ... 4-bc-happy...

If you want to go here I can. Again.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 91 by Danmark]

Really? So explain the four corners Revelation talks about. Is the Earth a cube?

They had four directions just like we do. In fact we still say the four corners of the Earth when speaking of the entire earth.

How could the devil show him the entire Earth from a high mountain if the Earth is a sphere?

Matthew 4:8-11

"Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to Him, “All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.� Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.’ �

The devil showed him all of the kingdoms of the world and their glory. Jesus would not be able to see the glory of the kingdoms of the world from any height. So that means that the devil had to be showing Jesus the glory of the kingdoms of the world a different way other than reflected rays from the earth.

Why does the Earth have a "foundation" if it is a sphere?

Is something not holding the crust up? Does not the Earth have structure? God built the Earth on the structure that He made.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 93 by EarthScienceguy]


Huh? It's impossible for Jesus to see all the kingdoms at once because the earth is round and therefore the Devil needed to take him to a very high mountain in order to show Jesus their glory in a manner not involving physical sight?

Why bring him to a mountain in the first place?

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 88 by Danmark]

Of course you don't, "Science Guy." And maybe the entire band is out of step with you. Why cite anything at all from science, since you don't believe in it?

Modern science and the scientific method was developed out of Christianity. Bacon was a Christian wanting to know more about the character of God. He knew that Romans 1 said "19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse"

This was the focus of Science up until the enlightenment period. Now just because some have veered off the original intent of science is of no concern to me.

Maybe you should change your name to "EarthBibleguy."
Why use the word "primate" at all, since it's from that 'science stuff.'

Maybe I will.

I do not have a problem with the word primate except when it is associated with man.

BTW, how old IS the Earth, EarthBibleguy? According to the begats in Genesis it's about 6023 years old.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/hi ... 4-bc-happy...

If you want to go here I can. Again.

I must have missed your 'age of the Earth' proof.
Anyway, you are suggesting science took a wrong turn in the 17th, 18th Centuries and needs to go back to being Bible based? BTW, I believe it is obvious error to claim science grew out of Christianity. Science is an entirely knew way of determining reality. Instead of divine revelation and faith, science is based on empirical observation. It is the opposite of faith based epistemology.
Or are you claiming Paul was a scientist?

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 84 by EarthScienceguy]

In the Biblical classification system man stands alone as God's special creation, as evidenced by the special characteristics that man has.

And please tell us what "special characteristics" man has that can't be explained 100% by the evolution of a more advanced brain, which developed in stages starting with the smaller and less capable brains of earlier primates, and earlier animals before primates arose. There is nothing else, besides our advanced brains, that is "special" about humans. Many other animals have heads with a brain inside, eyes, ears, noses, torsos with legs and arms, finger and toes, body hair, live-born young, etc. And many of these animals are far stronger and faster than humans, with better hearing and eyesight, etc.

The only thing "special" about humans is that we evolved a large and complex brain that is about 80% neocortex, and which is capable of abstract thought far beyond any other animals. But this in no way suggests that humans are special creatures created by a god ... it only shows that we developed the necessary mutations, reinforced by natural selection, that allowed growth and complexity of the brain organ. It isn't complicated when you think about it, and no reason to invent explanations when we have one that works, and has been positively demonstrated to be valid in the real world.

[Danmark]

I'm curious about how creationists deal with the ancestors of Homo sapiens, including
Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo Neanderthalensis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

Was God experimenting with other versions of humans until he got it right?
Did God just plant fossils to mislead unbelievers?
Perhaps animal life evolved naturally on Earth until God intervened.

None of these explanations make the least bit of sense, so what happened?
Evolution does make sense, so how do Bible literalists explain the evidence?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 95 by Danmark]

I must have missed your 'age of the Earth' proof.
Anyway, you are suggesting science took a wrong turn in the 17th, 18th Centuries and needs to go back to being Bible based? BTW, I believe it is obvious error to claim science grew out of Christianity. Science is an entirely knew way of determining reality. Instead of divine revelation and faith, science is based on empirical observation. It is the opposite of faith based epistemology.
Or are you claiming Paul was a scientist?

I am claiming that the world view shifted during the enlightenment. During the enlightenment men shifted their view of God. emphasized human reason, scientific empiricism, simultaneously discounting what was spiritual, supernatural, and consequently biblical. Philosophers no longer look to God as the explanation for the world, but rather sought to account for everything in rationalist, naturalistic, and in deistic terms. Philosophers like Voltaire, Locke, Hume.

As men began to place themselves above God and their own reason over Scripture, it was not long until rationalism gained access into the church through its claim to academic elitism – denied the inspiration of Scripture, denied the inerrancy of the Bible, infiltrated Protestantism in Europe and then America. So-called Christian scholars began to question everything, including Scripture, including the historical Jesus, Mosaic authorship, whatever.

The scientific method that was born out of a man's desire to know God began to be used as a method to defame the name of God and this is still the case today.

The scientific method is simply a means to discover previously unknown observations about the universe in which we live. The interpretation of these observations is based in the world view in which you have.

If your worldview is that there is no God then you will interpret the observations according to that world view. If you worldview says that there is a God in heaven then you will interpret the same observations accordingly. This tension began at the enlightenment and continues today for the most part.

Although the postmodern thinker no longer believes that reason can answer all the questions about nature. They believe that there is no such thing as absolute truth. In this form we are all more modern thinkers. We believe for the most part that there is an absolute truth. Modern thinkers believed that they could find absolute truth through reason. Postmodern thinkers of seen this to be untrue. Absolute truth cannot be found through reason. So postmodern thinker say that there is no such thing as absolute truth. Morality is relative to the situation.

You may want to say that you are correct but the postmodern thinkers of today say there is no such thing as truth. Pilate said the same thing to Jesus. "What is truth."

Biblical Christianity has not moved. What the pre reformers believed about the Bible we still believe about the Bible. This is why I say I do not care about what modern thinking is on issues regarding faith and the Bible. After all the reasoning after volumes of books written on how there is no God. They have now concluded that there is no such thing as truth.

But I do know there is a God in heaven. And every time I debate with you all. I am saddened that your eyes have been closed to the truth just as Romans 1 says.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 98 by EarthScienceguy]

But I do know there is a God in heaven. And every time I debate with you all. I am saddened that your eyes have been closed to the truth just as Romans 1 says.

You're missing a very fundamental point. Science and the scientific method are based on observations, experiment and testing, etc. to find definite answers to questions via these processes. Everything that modern science claims to be "known" (such as a heliocentric solar system, spherical earth, age of the earth, etc.) are derived from measurement and observation. They are not simply made up out of thin air.

In contrast, religion is purely made up by men, who have concocted literally thousands of gods over the millennia. Not one of these creatures has ever been demonstrated to exist. Biblical "scripture" has no validity at all. It is simply the writings of ancient, scientifically illiterate men who had no science available to guide their thinking. So it was natural for them to make up stories. There is no comparison to these old writings of fiction, and modern science.

You can't possibly "know" that any particular god exists, or that a place called heaven exists, etc. These concepts are purely imagined by man and there is zero evidence to the contrary. Never has been.

[postroad]

[Replying to post 98 by EarthScienceguy]

So we're all so degenerate that God had given us over to a lie?

Paul certainly knew how to talk out of both sides of his mouth.

It seems salvation isn't fully an act of grace after all? Christians are allowed
to degenerate non believers because the believers had the strength of character to accept the "truth" while the reprobate remained so obstinate that God finished what they started and gave them over to total depravity.

Although it seems somehow believers are no less depraved than non believers, now or then.

New International Version (NIV)

Dealing With a Case of Incest
5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this? 3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. 4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,[a] so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

6 Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[c] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.�