Piorokrat wrote:
> news:3fe2fd0f$1_4@corp.newsgroups.com...
>
>>Piorokrat wrote:
>>
>>
>
>
>>>news:nd44uvoial858vdba1e4jlvr42a4kjvql2@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 13:59:41 +0000 (UTC), "Piorokrat"
>>>><piorokrat@autograf.pl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>>>w
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In talk.origins I read this message from "Piorokrat"
>>>>>><piorokrat@autograf.pl>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>My view of God is that he can simply call things into existence in an
>>>>>>>already completed and mature state.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I thought this was what you meant, but I could not believe it.
>>>>>>You actually believe in a God who deceives people. That is what
>>>>>>you have said. God makes things look like they have a past, a
>>>>>>history. They look like they had gone through events that had not
>>>>>>taken place. So, for instance, God could have created the world
>>>>>>Last Thursday and just made it look old. How could you tell if
>>>>>>you have a God willing to deceive people like that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>There is so much deceit in this world that if we are going to start
>>>
>>>blaming
>>>
>>>
>>>>>God for deceit we'll get nowhere regardless of what we think about
>>>
>>>evolution
>>>
>>>
>>>>>and creation.
>>>>>
>>>>>The point is he TOLD us that it was made perfect, ie. mature.
>>>>>
>>>>>If you chosse to believe otherwise, up to you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It appears that you are trying to believe otherwise:
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:4
>>>>And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light
>>>
>>>>from the darkness.
>>>
>>>>Good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:10
>>>>And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the
>>>>waters called he seas: and God saw that it was good.
>>>>
>>>>Good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:12
>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>Good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:18
>>>>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.
>>>
>>>>Good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:21
>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>Good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:25
>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>Good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>Gen 1:31
>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>Very good, not perfect.
>>>>
>>>>God said that what he had made was good, and the word perfect doesn't
>>>>appear until Noah, well after original sin.
>>>
>>>
>>>Alright. Good point.
>>>It would be difficult to know what perfection in creation means to God
>>>But if the creation was good enough for Him, it's certainly more than
>
> good
>
>>>enough for me.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Where does God say that everything was mature and perfect, or perfect
>>>>and mature, or that the word good means perfect and the word perfect
>>>>means mature so by saying good or very good he really meant mature? I
>>>>thought that the word was to be taken literally?
>>>>
>>>>It appears that he made man mature, but he made the earth produce
>>>>plants and trees which doesn't give the impression that they were
>>>>mature.
>>>
>>>
>>>It seems to me that trees take even longer than men to mature.
>>>
>>>
>>> "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass. . . " sounds
>>>
>>>
>>>>like God made the process of abiogenesis possible, doesn't it? If that
>>>>process still exists today then the scientific theories of abiogenesis
>>>>sound like they are on the right track; doesn't it? "And the earth
>>>>brought forth grass . . ." isn't that what scientists are basically
>>>>saying today?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>The earth, together with its atmosphere, contained the basical elements;
>
> the
>
>>>hydrogen, the oxygen, the carbon, the nitrogen, potassium, etc etc etc
>
> that
>
>>>plants are made up of. I understand this to mean that he made the
>
> elements
>
>>>and inorganic compounds first and organic compounds and the building
>
> blocks
>
>>>of life were then produced out of this material.
>>>
>>>It is also clear that life comes from this planet and did not come from
>>>another planet.
>>>
>>>Abiogenesis is not possibly referred to from the Biblical perspective as
>>>God's cretive activity is explicit. The earth is bringing this life
>
> forth at
>
>>>the command of God.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Gen 1:20 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.
>>>>
>>>>Sounds like abiogenesis, doesn't it? Sounds like God made it possible
>>>>for the earth and water to produce living things, doesn't it? Sounds
>>>>like scientists are trying to build a theory that would ironically
>>>>make this correct, right?
>>>
>>>
>>>They don't have to 'make it correct'. See above comments.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>So what this boils down to is that you feel that your religious views
>>>>are the only ones that count and that everyone else is wrong and you
>>>>came here to tell us this little nugget of insight, right? Well if
>>>>that is the case I have to refer you to Lenny's posts and the 2
>>>>questions he has been asking that no one seems to want to answer.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>As far as I can make out there are two main schools of thought on the
>>>origins of the world, Creation and Evolution. Creationists may differ
>
> among
>
>>>themselves as to the exact answer to questions and evolutionists do
>
> also,
>
>>>but effectively these are the two schools. Evolutionists are in number
>
> by
>
>>>far the greater, although most people believing evolution are of course
>>>going with the crowd. Creationists, whether Christian, Jewish or Moslim,
>>>represent the other view, and if you take Usenet as a cross-section of
>
> world
>
>>>society, we observe these two camps debating. Other world views exist,
>
> such
>
>>>as those represented by the Eastern religions, but they are not tending
>
> as
>
>>>far as I have seen to get involved in the great debate between
>
> Creationists
>
>>>and Evolutionists.
>>>
>>>We are Creationists, you are Evolutionists, who's gonna make you guys
>
> think
>
>>>if we don't?
>>>
>>>As scientists, you should welcome an opposition, you should even for
>
> that
>
>>>reason be willing to have both sides presented to kids in class.
>>>
>>>But Lenny, and others, defend their position with zealous envy, and when
>
> any
>
>>>Creationist wishing to put the view from the other side comes along they
>
> get
>
>>>treated as if they were Jehovah's Witnesses or something. I don't call
>
> that
>
>>>a spirit of scientific enquiry.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Thanks for sharing your religious opinions with us.
>
>
> No problem.
>
>
>>Are you speaking to us behalf of God, or are you speaking to us on
>>behalf of yourself.
>>
>
>
> On behalf of God,
I see. And why is it, exactly, that YOU are speaking on behalf of God,
but Ross or Behe or Spong or Mother Theresa are not.
Did God give you some sort of credentials to flash at people who aren't
sure whether you're really speaking for Him?
as instructed to go forth into all the world and preach
> the Gospel.
>
Uh, ALL Christians are instructed to do that.
Their opinions and interpretations aren't the same as yours, though.
Why are yours "on behalf of God", but theirs aren't.
> If it was down to me, I'd just hang out and have a laugh.
>
Why isn't it down to you.
>
>>Or don't you think there is any difference.
>>
>
>
> A very big difference.
And that difference is what . . . . . . .
===============================================
Lenny Flank
"There are no loose threads in the web of life"
Creation "Science" Debunked:
http://www.geocities.com/lflank
DebunkCreation Email list:
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/DebunkCreation
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 |
| 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 |
| 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 |
| 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | 188 | 189 | 190 | 191 | 192 | 193 | 194 | 195 | 196 | 197 | 198 | 199 | 200 | 201 | 202 | 203 | 204 | 205 | 206 | 207 | 208 | 209 |
| 210 | 211 | 212 | 213 | 214 | 215 | 216 | 217 | 218 | 219 | 220 | 221 | 222 | 223 | 224 |
|