ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Is Creation Finished

Is Creation finished? Are any new species being created today?

Join Our Free Singles and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 6/25/10
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog



If evolution is taught in school, then all beliefs should be taught in school.
---micha9344 on 7/11/10


... you enter this world in water you exit this world in blood...it is appointed once for man to die and after death the judgement...there is no peaceful oblivion....and there is no such thing as a dead atheist...for me to say less would do you injustice
---richard on 7/11/10


Micha,

I have repeatedly said there is a lot that can't be explained. Assigning the unexplainable to some invisible entity explains nothing. An honest answer is ,"I don't know."

"First Cause"? Really? Okay. What "caused" the "First Cause"? Without or without 'god' you are stuck in infinite regress, AKA as in eternity or the infinity of space and time.

Do you really have to make up something so you can pretend you understand it? Or pretend 'god' understands it, so you don't have to worry or think about it?

Think about this: where were you from the day before you were born back in time forever? Does it matter? And will it hurt to be in the same place after you are dead?
---atheist on 7/11/10


I said, at I am tired of playing. I have no intention of trying to explain anything from a scientific POV much less defend against your beliefs of what you think science and evolutionary theory say.

You all are playing at, "If evolution is false then Genesis is true." Nonsense. The statement should be "If evolution is false, then any other unprovable belief or mythology could be true." Which is logically true, but meaningless.

So fine. To you the science with which you disagree or find contradictory to the Bible you dismiss as mythology. And I do the same with your god speaking "creation" into "existence".

Perhaps we should teach "Beliefs" in school including everything?
---atheist on 7/11/10


atheist, you must be the most knowlegeable man on earth. Knowing how everything is done is pretty amazing. I personally don't have to know how things are done to believe they are done. I believe God did it.
Tell me again how life started on earth and please give me details. How the amino acids got together in the right sequence? You believe, yet you know not how. What, pray tell, is the difference in belief in nonliving random particles bumping into each other in such a way to form life or the belief in a superior eternal being that created it by His Word? I know, I know.. who created Him?.. yet you believe in something eternal, that was always here and not created. The first cause. Well, don't be chicken, What is eternal to you?
---micha9344 on 7/11/10




atheist you are being dishonest.

I did not say Christians invented science.

Surely Christians of the past held some views with which I would not agree-the nature of falible humanity.

I have not spoken of 'views', only of the results of the scientific method. That considered proof only comes from testable, repeatable, observable scientific methods.

What I have repeatedly said is, we are in the same position-neither creation or evolution can be proved by the scientific method. Obvious fact!

However I believe the available 'evidence' better supports Biblical creation than naturalistic evolution.

Obviously we were not there at creation but God has told us in Genesis.
---Warwick on 7/11/10


'atheist': Wow! A breakthrough!

"Jerry fine. Your "assertion that the physical geologic evidence PROVES a universal flood," is true. Now prove that your god did it"

First, since the geologic layers (and the fossils within them) were not layed down over great expanses of time, you must now admit that the life forms they contain could not possibly have been produced by evolutionary processes. In fact, NO naturalistic process produced either the first or any subsequent life form. Thus, the creation of life as well as the mass destruction of it were rather rapid events, and the creation of life was most likely supernatural - since no logical naturalistic explanation for it can be posited.

125-word limit.
---jerry6593 on 7/11/10


Jerry fine. Your "assertion that the physical geologic evidence PROVES a universal flood," is true. Now prove that your god did it and it really didn't just rain a lot, and then explain how he spoke creation into existence.

Warwick fine. Christians invented science. Only the beliefs of Christian scientists with which you agree therefore should be considered valid, particularly if they are long dead. The views of current scientists are valid if they agree with you. Same question as to Jerry,---explain how your god spoke creation into existence.

Both: When neither of you can explain how god did it, explain why believing god did it is better that telling the truth and saying you don't know...
---atheist on 7/10/10


Exactly Jerry, you can't argue or even reason anyone into salvation. First of all unless you are born again you can't .........


Secondly, rebellion is deep in the heart and straight out of Genesis 6, hence the power needed for grace we find in John 17.

No one comes to the Son unless the Father sends him.

And you are right that physical geological evidence proves a universal flood not long-age uniformitarianism. Even Darwin admitted uniformitarianism would be necessary to sustain his theory and 150 years later he still waits.
---larry on 7/10/10


- He who knows not & knows not he knows not: he is a fool ~ shun him.

- He who knows not & knows he knows not: he is simple ~ teach him.

- He who knows & knows not he knows: he is asleep ~ wake him.

- He who knows & knows he knows: he is wise ~ follow him.
---Leon on 7/10/10




\\If you think that new speices of animals is something, try new species of plants.
---francis on 7/8/10\\

Plants hybridize all the time, francis, just like hoses and donkeys.

Didn't you know that?
---Cluny on 7/9/10


Warwick: An "enlightened" atheist is an oxymoron! Our 'atheist' friend seems to be incapable of an honest interchange of ideas. He makes wild accusations, and when counterarguments are presented, he ignores them and takes yet another detour away from rationality. It's like pushing a rope - it gets you nowhere but frustrated.

When the 'atheist' directly addresses my assertion that the physical geologic evidence PROVES a universal flood and not long-age uniformitarianism, thereby rendering Evolution a false theory, then I'll resume discussions with him. Until then, I'm through pushing his rope.
---jerry6593 on 7/10/10


atheist you endeavour to avoid the fact that these 4 great scientists (there are many, many others, like minded) were active, witnessing, committed Christians. Going far far beyond paying 'lip service' to Christianity to avoid consequences, as you claimed.

Men have always doubted God's existence "The fool says in his heart there is no God." Psalm 14:1. Rejection of God is ancient.

Untold millions of Christians have been, and continue to be killed because they were/are not prepared to deny Jesus. But you claim those Christians who developed empirical science were only nominal Christians, solely to avoid the consequences.

Your ignorance of history is astounding in one who claims to be enlightened.
---Warwick on 7/9/10


Warwick,

The idea that anyone living during those times would openly or inwardly entertain the non-existence of god is ludicrous.

St. Augustine also struggled with the resolution of that which was observable and the contradictory descriptions in 'scripture', 1200 years earlier.

Obviously a culture saturated with religion would force an explanation which included the possiblity that scripture was incorrectly interpreted. Something you are unwilling to admit.
---atheist on 7/9/10


atheist

Consider these scientists:

Robert Boyle (b1627) active evangelizing Christian, interested in missions, financed Bible translation. Founded 'Boyle lectures" for proving the Christian faith.

John Ray (b1627) committed Christian, wrote a number of books on Christianity chiefly 'The Wisdom of God Manifested in the Works of the Creation.'

Isaac Barrow (b1630) taught Isaac Newton. Later resigned to devote his life to preaching God's word.

Isaac Newton (b1642) Considered to be the greatest scientist ever, committed Christian from youth, wrote many papers and books promoting and defending Christian faith.

Just 4 examples, want more?

They idea they did so out of fear is ludicrous!
---Warwick on 7/9/10


Warwick,

Fine. Add to your list of delusions that the methodolgy of science was a Christian invention. And that anyone would dare not to express belief in god in the times of those men.

Again, was there history before 11,000 years ago? Skip the science, tell me, when did it all begin?
---atheist on 7/8/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Travel Packages


atheist, that you cannot design such an experiment to prove your evolutionary beliefs proves beyond reasonable doubt that you are a man of faith just as we Christians are people of faith.

The fathers of the modern scientific method were Christians, as the atheist historian of science Dr Loren Eiseley clearly attested in the quote I gave. If you believe the fathers of the moden scientific method were not Christians then be honest enough to supply their names.

As to being tortured until they believed-do you speak of Keppler, Bacon, Boyle, Steno, Mather, Pascal, Copernicus, Hooke, Brahe, Newton, Linnaeus, Faraday, Herschel, Harvey, Cuvier, Bell, Babbage, Morse, et al? When were they tortured to force them to become Christian?
---Warwick on 7/8/10


No history before 11,000 years.
But how is anyone going to prove differently?
Our 'lack of proof' doesn't prove God, yet we believe.
Your lack of proof doesn't prove 'no God' yet you believe.
You call it 'blind faith' on our side yet when you have no proof, you call it science.
science being knowledge not guesses. Notice theory starts with theo--belief/faith? As on theory of evolution, big bang theory, etc.
---micha9344 on 7/8/10


Thanks Jerry, yes there is no self-reflection by the atheist because there is "nothing".
No conscience, no moral agent and therefore no evil or good and certainly no future beyond the last beat of the heart. The belief we weren't designed or made with a purpose and so we will die purposeless.
The atheist must incessantly question without any desire to receive an answer that may require action on his part. For what is the point of self-improvement for the creature defined by chance.



How sad to live 60-80 years without gratefulness or joy. Even more stunning Jerry, they do this by choice.
---larry on 7/8/10


Dear Atheist

Many Scientist today say they are Christian. I believe the number is about 40%. 5% of Scientist believe in the six day creation.

Many in the past still claimed Christianity long after you could be punished for not being a Christian. You need to study history a little closer.

Now modern Science Philosphy makes some basic hypothesis first that all questions must be based on empircal evidence that no supernatural explainations are allowed.

One point I am not convinced that the world was created 6k ago. I am convinced GOD did it in six days not on Science but on faith.

I am also convinced that Biogeneis is an impossible event along with scales becoming feathers.
---Samuel on 7/8/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


And failure on my part to produce a 'scientific experiment' satisfactory on your terms proves your mythology? Nonsense and you know it. You pick and chose the science that will result in the results you want.

Science is an ongoing investigation for explanations of the reality we perceive. That you pretend that it provides any absolute knowledge demonstrates your ignorance of the method. That you pretend that science was invented by Christians is nonsense---you either professed belief or were tortured into a confession. Or, assumed political correctness by searching for the how of god.

Again, I am tired of playing.

Really, just skip the science, and tell me---was there "history" before say 11,000 years ago?
---atheist on 7/8/10


On day six God stopped working
On day seven he rested
On day eight a donkey and a horse got together and made a mule.

If you think that new speices of animals is something, try new species of plants.
---francis on 7/8/10


I know that on the seventh day God rested. If there are any new species and I am not saying there is, [I know I am sounding stupid}, God is making them....He is the Creator of all life. I do not care for this question!
---catherine on 7/8/10


atheist,'naturalistic processes' refers to things 'created' by forces within nature-Naturalistic. Not without nature-'Supernatural.'

I have always said I believe by faith but not blind faith (Romans 1:20). Conversely you have blind faith as you hold to natualistic origins of life without having any evidence to support your faith. I do disagree with what you call science which is not science but belief dressed up as science. True science, from which came our technological wonders is (As Dr Eiseley admits) a product of Christian thinking. It is about testable, observable, repeatable. Can you propose a scientific experiment to prove your view? Yes or no?
---Warwick on 7/7/10


Send a Free Fourth of July Ecard


Warwick,

Like I said. I am tired of playing.

"Naturalistic processes"?!

Exactly what is unnatural, or "supernatural" other than anything you claim cannot be explained in some fashion that you deem explainable.

Everything else you relegate to either your "blind faith" or what you consider mine.

But if you or Jerry can't explain the process by which your 'god' spoke creation into existence using a modicum of reason, you certainly cannot denigrate the science with which you disagree and cherry pick the science with which you do agree.

Why don't you and Jerry just leave science out of it and say you believe what you believe and damn anything or anyone who disagrees?
---atheist on 7/7/10


\\Who knows what monsterously mutated life forms (species/creatures) may eventually surface from the Gulf's polluted waters & the stagnant mind-pools of our imagination? \\

It's not necessary to wait for the results of the oil spill.

We already have curious hermaphroditic polymorph fish and other creatures in waters that have been polluted by estrogens passing through women's bodies who have taken them for birth control. These cause strange things to happen to male fish that make it impossible for them to be fertile. Some have even had one ovary and one testis.
---Cluny on 7/7/10


The fog on this blog has gotten as thick as oil spilling into & polluting the Gulf Coast of the United States. Who knows what monsterously mutated life forms (species/creatures) may eventually surface from the Gulf's polluted waters & the stagnant mind-pools of our imagination? Surely, "God" does!

Could Godzilla (or worst) really step out of the realm of our perverse imaginations & rain destruction throughout the nations? In Atheist's mind that would no doubt be "godzilla". :)

By the way, monsters (demons) don't have to be large to cause devastatingly great destruction.
---Leon on 7/7/10


atheist as pointed our repeatedly we are not talking proof, but faith, and that based upon the available evidence.

You scorn our faith then concerning how life sprang from non-life write "We don't know YET! So What?! That's the simple answer. No answer does not prove your 'god'." You have no proof, nor even evidence that life came about by naturalistic processes but still you believe. You are a man of blind faith indeed.

Your lack of an answer does not prove God (not god) is Creator. But it shows you have no answer therefore nothing to show God is not Creator. And obviously no right to scorn our faith.
---Warwick on 7/7/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


atheist this is no 'game.'

The point is, you have no proof, nor even evidence that life occurred by naturalistic processes. Therefore you have no scientific foundation to say God is not Creator. You admit no naturalistic explanation for the origin of life exists. You and we accept our belief by faith.

Your definition of 'evolution' is narrow as the origin of life is part of the atheistic mind-set: life had to occur by naturalistic processes, and then naturalistic evolutionary processes could, with no intelligent intervention, be 'set' in motion. Even 'set' infers intelligent intervention.

By absolute faith you write "A more complete and irrefutable explanation from 'science' may and undoubtably will come."
---Warwick on 7/7/10


Larry: Very well said, yourself! I particularly appreciated your observation:

"Excuse upon excuse to avoid facing the fear of the man in the mirror."

I also believe that atheists continue their anti-God attacks because of the irritation of the still, small voice of the Holy Spirit whispering to their consciences "You might be wrong."

Notice that he will never engage in an honest scientific debate, but rather continues to spew the hate rhetoric copied from his favorite atheist website. Augustine, indeed! Like he reads Augustine every day.
---jerry6593 on 7/7/10


When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.-Sherlock Holmes-Doubleday
Once science eliminates all the impossibilties, God, no matter how improbable, will be shown true.
Isaiah 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth [in] righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.
Romans 14:11 For it is written, [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
---micha9344 on 7/6/10


Warwick,

Sorry, but this time I am not playing.

The game you and all play is to pretend that if evolutionary theory cannot explain 'life' to your satisfaction, that that failure (which you define as failure) prove the existence of your 'god'.

It just ain't necessarily so...Evolution has nothing to do with it.

A more complete and irrefutable explanation from 'science' may and undoubtably will come.

But most importantly you have still provided no evidence that your 'god' or any 'god' or 'gods' had anything to do with anything. Or has anything to do with anything now...
---atheist on 7/6/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


had a freind who was an atheist...on the subject of not eating pork for example he would produce a fascinating monologue about the lipesomes in the meat being unhealthy (anything but tackle the biblical side of the issue) ...dunno wot Augustine was trying to say but I bet he wasnt an evolutionist!...anyway put in my 5 eggs,which for the creationist cause the chicken laid afterwards..by the way.....
---richard on 7/6/10


James many evolutionists say the 2nd Law doesn't apply to open systems. False. Dr John Ross of Harvard University states:

"..there are no known violations of the second law of thermodynamics. Ordinarily the second law is stated for isolated systems, but the second law applies equally well to open systems. There is somehow associated with the field of far-from-equilibrium thermodynamics the notion that the second law of thermodynamics fails for such systems. It is important to make sure that this error does not perpetuate itself." John Ross, Chemical and Engineering News, 7 July 1980, p.40.
---Warwick on 7/6/10


Jerry, very well said.

Creation is finished because God said so and created the Sabbath as a sign of his own completeness not a need for rest.

The fool always argues for proof not seeing evidence of the creator is found in the existence of the creature.

God is not proven but revealed and his glory is seen throughout creation and easily visible for all who truly seek him. Atheists, the biggest fools in nature, know this but avoid truly seeking him for fear they will find him and then must worship him. Their foolish errand is rooted in rebellion and the laughable fear of truth.
Excuse upon excuse to avoid facing the fear of the man in the mirror.
---larry on 7/6/10


atheist one simple to understand evidence of God's creation is the appearance of life itself.

In the evolutionary story everything came about without intelligent specific input. Look at me, yesterday I was dead chemicals and today a programmed complex life form-mankind here I come!

Any sane person viewing my new computer knows it is the result of considerable specific intelligent input. But then (if an evolutionist) considers the original, socalled 'simple cell' made itself. Even creating itself with the ability to reproduce! That of course is a 'just so story', a statement of faith.

That the 'simple' cell is vastly more ordered and complex than the best computer is an observable fact. Evolution falls at the first hurdle.
---Warwick on 7/6/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


Richard, you need to do more research.


"...even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements....and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience....it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian....talking nonsense on these topics, and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil....

St. Augustine
---atheist on 7/6/10


"God left evidence of His creation."---Jerry from another blog.

Again, let's see it Jerry.

You still have the 'god did evidence' to deal with even without evolution. And if your god did it then you need to come up with an explanation of how your god can speak things into existence.

(Which seems to be a much bigger problem of your straw man question of "abiogenesis". We don't know YET! So What?! That's the simple answer. No answer does not prove your 'god'.)

But try to stay on track, ignore evolution and explain your theory on how god did it. This should be interesting... And BTW, how do you know for sure it wasn't someone else's 'god'?
---atheist on 7/6/10


the suns gonna die when it runs out of fuel,I call that case closed...but if you disagree fine,I have no need to argue the subject,.... but tell me how does a caterpillar "evolve" into a butterfly...where is your science on that one James?
---richard on 7/6/10


Richard: The IDEA of evolution CERTAINLY DOES NOT break the second law of thermodynamics......

This is because the living world is NOT a closed system, where the second law must occur, it is an OPEN system

People like you, who quote science without knowing what you are talking about, tend to riun things for the other Christians who are trying to find REAL SCIENTIFIC reasons why evolution is problematic

PLEASE learn before you speak!!!!!!
---James on 7/6/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


dear atheist here is proof for,weigh it carefully! at junior school you may have taken a caterpillar,watched it pupate etc,a good teacher would have told you this process is called metamorphysis...later they would teach you evolution,thus forgeting...it is not possible to evolve from a caterpillar to a moth!...it only works,if the creature copys the pattern of the way it was "created"...there are many other proofs,eg the "law" of evolution breaks Einsteins "2nd law of thermodynamics"...not good science,let alone the simple fact that the missing link is still missing!
---richard on 7/6/10


Peter: Thanks for the rational response to my assertions. I had hoped that my friend, 'atheist' could do likewise, but alas, it doesn't seem likely.

To have any credibility at all, evolution MUST have long ages of gradual development (gradualism or uniformitarianism) to produce the varied species entombed in the fossil record. But this record shows sudden burial in vast, parallel layers, with constituent sorting as by hydraulic turbidite action rather than gradual accumulation. Further, there exist great unconformities (missing and out of place layers) worldwide, that belie the concept of long age gradualism.
---jerry6593 on 7/6/10


Peter regarding evidence of Noah's flood, about 70% of the earth's land surface is covered by sedimentary rock. Obviously deposited by water.

Consider the Grand Canyon, where there is about 1.6km depth of sedimentary rock. Once it was thought these layers were deposited little by little over vast ages. Current thinking is the various layers were deposited catastrophically, each in a relatively short period of time. Considering there is no evidence of erosion, plant growth, etc between each deep layer, a solid case can be made that this whole 1.6 km depth of sediment was deposited in a very short period of time.

This all fits with the catastrophic nature of Noah's flood, but obvioiusly not with deposition over vast ages.
---Warwick on 7/6/10


Jerry6593 'Geologic catastrophism is evidence of the Noahic flood'

Your statement is fine, as long as there is evidence for geologic catastrophism (at the time of the Noahic flood).

You beleive there is sufficient evidence, and I believe the flood occurred, but some people (even Christians) may say that they do not have enough PHYSICAL evidence for the flood, and there I would not want to disagree with them

But I do accept the young earth view

Your other two pieces of evidence I will comment on in my next posting
---peter3594 on 7/5/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


jerry6593: While your comments are interesting, you need some more proper evidence to say they prove Biblical creation.

Please give some fuller explanantion
---peter3594 on 7/4/10


Open, you should reply to Jerry's questions.

Many people claim 'science' has proved how everything originated, but cannot show how their claim can be proved by the scientific method. This is because science is not good with past events. The scientific method concerns repeatable experiments in the present. That is how amazing advances in technology have come about. This method has nothing to say about creation or evolution. These two beliefs about the past cannot be scientifically proved.

Then along comes evidence which is not proof. Nonetheless the available evidence better supports the Biblical creation view.

If you truly have an an open mind, this can be investigated. Are you interested?
---Warwick on 7/4/10


"God left evidence of His creation."---Jerry from another blog.

Still waiting for the evidence Jerry. Pointing out things you claim unexplainable does not provide evidence of anything.

How do you know it was god and not Moe and His Two Hairy Friends?

Claiming this or that is unexplainable does nothing.
---atheist on 7/3/10


Jerry, I am finally back on line.

Right in the middle of producing end of financial year figures my computer died. And my printer began to print artwork/graphics/photos red. I was also trying to finish another project which was continually delayed by rain. All in all a stressful week.

As regards your comments on evolution on Friday I listened to a young friend doing his first ever creation talk. One of many good points he made was about the obviousness of design. Looking at a computer no sane person would imagine it came about without significant specific ordered intelligent input. But evolutionist would have us believe the so called 'simple' cell came about by chance-random-processes, without any intelligent input. Fat chance.
---Warwick on 7/3/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


Cluny: "Actually, while multicellular organisms date from the Cambrian period, single celled fossils have been found in pre-Cambrian rock."

Actually, the Cambrian layer contains fossils from virtually every known phylum, with absolutely no precursors in the Pre-Cambrian. Thus, the Cambrian fossils and most all life forms could not have evolved from anything. The fact that single-celled organisms (and worm holes as well) inhabited the Pre-Cambrian is no more suprising than the fact that they currently inhabit the mud of the ocean floor. A place, incidentally, where no fossil formation is currently occurring either.
---jerry6593 on 7/3/10


Higgins: I do not find your doctrines to be in accordance with scripture. Israel is not the Harlot of Revelation, The New Jerusalem is a real city with real dimensions being constructed in Heaven by Jesus ("I go to prepare a place for you"), and will ultimately come down from God out of heaven and come to rest on the Mount of Olives.

God does indeed continue to be involved in conceptions and in the very existence of matter.

Jer 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee

Psa 145:16 Thou openest thine hand, and satisfiest the desire of every living thing.

Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
---jerry6593 on 7/3/10


\\The Cambrian Explosion and Polonium 210 haloes are evidence of fiat creation.\\

Actually, while multicellular organisms date from the Cambrian period, single celled fossils have been found in pre-Cambrian rock.

This, of course, does not deny the idea of Creation in Genesis, which is still an orderly, sequential event.

As for time (which would have application to the question of creation) and eternity, present theoretical physics says that time is actually relative. Even GPS satellites have to be reset at least every day (if not more frequently), because time passes on them more slowly (or is it more quickly) than on the earth's surface.

Only eternity is real and definitive--but then, that's a quality of God Himself.
---Cluny on 7/3/10


I don't see a conflict between Cluny and Leon on the idea of etrnity and time

Eternity is outside of time ... does not depend on time.

Eternity is not measurable, since it's been from ever, and will be for ever.

Time though dependent on the consciousness of things ... no that's not the right word, because created things exist during time.

There's no need for time if there is nothing. Time did not exist before the Creation (whether God did that 6000 or billions of years ago ... that's a different argument)

But God existed for ever before Creation, so did eternity.
---alan8566_of_uk on 7/3/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Lead Generation


Open: "I like to keep an open mind. Could you also be honest and say whether or not you believe this is the case having looked at all the damming scientific evidence?"

I too have a scientific background. And, yes, I believe that the Bible gives a scientifically accurate account of creation. I recently posited the three following "evidences" of the Bible account. The person to whom I addressed the evidences was not able to respond. Perhaps you will be.

Geologic catastrophism is evidence of the Noahic flood.

The Cambrian Explosion and Polonium 210 haloes are evidence of fiat creation.

Abiogenesis is impossible by naturalistic processes, but is consistent as evidence of God's creative power.
---jerry6593 on 7/3/10


Believe as you like Cluny... The fact is time is permeated (saturated) by eternity. Were it not for the sustaining presence of God's eternity there could be no time.
---Leon on 7/2/10


Jerry:

I believe earthly creations have ceased. Obviously, when The Almighty raised up the Roman hords to destroy the Great Harlot, Israel, He then replaced the great city by creating the New Jerusalem, which is a spiritual Kingdom.

I also do not believe The Almighty forms and delivers every pregnancy every woman has had since Eve gave birth to Abel. I believe Almighty YaHWeH created an incredible biological process and then allowed it to work on its own, with very few Divine interventions along the way. In the same way, He set the sky and heavens into motion as well as the jet stream, etc.
---Higgins on 7/1/10


\\Eternity is before "time", eternity exists during "time" & endures after "time". In short Cluny, "time" is in eternity!
---Leon on 6/29/10\\

Wrong again.

That's like saying virginity exists during unchastity.

Eternity is outside of time, and is not affected by it.
---Cluny on 7/1/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Mortgages


open7568, Have you, having been "brought up with a scientific background", looked at all the scientific evidence concerning biblical archeology? About bible prophesy, concerning the timing of the origin of the prophesy and the actual events? (not of things to come).
---Steveng on 6/30/10


Since you made the charge Open, you need to first explain why you believe as you do. Then we'll have a better understanding of where you stand (your rationale). Knowing that would greatly enhance the discussion.
---Leon on 6/30/10


--------------------------------------------

Creation, having been brought up with a scientific background I would have to say that there was no creation in the first place. Im not trying to offend anyone but could someone please tell me why they believe any different, I like to keep an open mind. Could you also be honest and say whether or not you believe this is the case having looked at all the damming scientific evidence?

"Biblical (Canonized) and Christ-like replies ONLY"?

If this blog was not biest it would respect my freedom of thought and publish this reply.

--------------------------------------------
---open7568 on 6/30/10


God's is eternal, outside of time, what He ordained is the unfolding of the things He will do already in His plan, but we see in time. He already knows the ending for it was His plan. He already knows who will be born and knows when we will die, how we are born, whether a person see's or whether he is blind, or deaf, to whose parents we will be born to, who will believe and who will not, what country and whether to Christain parents or not. Who will receive mercy and who will not. Nothing is condition to our actions. All is in His plan from eternity past. And because He is Almighty Omnipotent God, all that He ordained will come to pass. Nothing will ever be a surprise for Him, and He will never learn anything He doesn't already know.
---MarkV. on 6/29/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


"Try again." Cluny, 6/29

Eternity is before "time", eternity exists during "time" & endures after "time". In short Cluny, "time" is in eternity!
---Leon on 6/29/10


Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth WERE FINISHED, and all the host of them.

You cannot really trust the bible can you?

First it says that creation was FINISHED, then we find out that God is still creating.

lET THE BIBLE ANSWER
---francis on 6/29/10


\\GOD IS CREATOR: ETERNITY PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE!!!
---Leon on 6/26/10\\

Try again.

Past, present, and future are qualities of time.

Eternity means OUTSIDE of time.
---Cluny on 6/29/10


John 4:34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.
John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
---micha9344 on 6/28/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


NO! It is not finish until Christ returns and we enter the "Day of Rest".
---JOhn on 6/28/10


Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

You cannot really trust the bible can you?

First it says that creation was FINISHED, then we find out that God is still creating.
---francis on 6/28/10


And he bestowed upon the women to continue the creation process. The plants and the animals, too, breed according to their own kind. Although all the words use the past tense of create, we are all still his creation.

But there is a time to shortly come to pass that God will create a new heaven and a new earth.
---Steveng on 6/26/10


Yes, God creates daily.
---Eloy on 6/26/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


"Create in me a clean heart O God ~ and renew a right spirit within me." Ps. 51:10

"...If any man [or woman] be in Christ, he [or she] is a new creature: old things are passed away ~ behold, all things are become new." 2 Cor. 5:17

GOD IS CREATOR: ETERNITY PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE!!!
---Leon on 6/26/10


||Free airconditioner from God. He is bringing us rain, which we need, STORM HAS ARRIVED. hOWEVER, THE ANSWER IS yes. God rested, so it was finished. I must go.
---catherine on 6/25/10||

I don't know what catherine's posting has to do with the subject of this blog.

In any case, it's 110 + in Phoenix today, so I don't know who is getting the air conditioner.
---Cluny on 6/25/10


God is extremely creative. Just look at how beautiful the world is,even in the sinful, cursed state it's in. I think maybe if God's creating now it's most likely on the plans for the new heaven & new earth we'll be enjoying later.The one with no sin or hasn't been cursed. Just think how beautiful that will be!!
---Reba on 6/25/10


God has created all the elements and 'kinds' during the first six days.
He also created 'kinds' with ability for variety. Ferns are still ferns even if a new species of fern is found. Frogs are still frogs even though the same may be true.
God does work within His creation to bring about His will.
There are up to 400billion stars in the Milky Way galaxy alone.
The current scientific guess for the age of the universe is about 14billion years old, up from 4 billion less than 10 years ago.
That would mean a star is formed on average every 13 days, yet NONE have been observed forming, not even counting the stars outside the galaxy.
---micha9344 on 6/25/10


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


Free airconditioner from God. He is bringing us rain, which we need, STORM HAS ARRIVED. hOWEVER, THE ANSWER IS yes. God rested, so it was finished. I must go.
---catherine on 6/25/10


Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

Genesis 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

Genesis 2:3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

unless there is another creator, Gods work in creation is finished.
---francis on 6/25/10


New species of plants and animals are constantly being found.

Whether these are new or simply newly discovered, I'm in no position to tell.

But with every baby (of whatever species) born, creation continues, in my view.

Cosmologists tell us that stars are still being formed, so I would say that creation continues.
---Cluny on 6/25/10


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.