At what order of complexity...

Originally posted by RJHinds
What you are missing is that God did it all in 6 days, not over billions of years. (Genesis 1)

We can clearly see with our own eyes it didn't take only 6 days. This is why non-believers think you're an idiot, and are not likely to believe *anything* you say.

This is why you're not doing Christianity any favors.

Originally posted by Suzianne
We can clearly see with our own eyes it didn't take only 6 days. This is why non-believers think you're an idiot, and are not likely to believe *anything* you say.

This is why you're not doing Christianity any favors.

So that means you don't believe Jesus. So how can you call yourself a Christian and not believe in what Jesus said about the creation?

Mark 10:6-9 King James Version (KJV)

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

I don't wish you to be deceived by Satan's lies like Eve was. Billions of years is a lie of Satan to reduce your confidence in the power of God. Six days is the truth that shows the mighty power of our God.

Originally posted by Suzianne
A billion years is a long time. I imagine life probably could have started and re-started many times before it gained a lasting foothold.

What you're missing though, is that it was under the hand of God, and so it was destined to eventually flourish. A billion years is a long time.

A billion years is a long time, but it does not mean a lot of time overcomes
all issues. I don't know why you think having a lot of time is enough to
have life start, and if necessary have it start over and over again. Time
isn't an answer to all problems, it is timing that matters! If you have all the
necessary parts but they are all not together at any time what does it
matter how much time you have? If the proper parts do not get mixed as
required then all the necessary ingredients get changed into something else
detrimental that would remove what was required, then more time wouldn’t
help. So again time doesn’t help overcome anything if all the necessary
ingredients are lost or not present. This doesn’t even touch all the
conditions such as environment, food, and the other concerns I have
already expressed.

In all of my posts where God plays the part, then all bets are off and all the
randomness I concern myself with are meaningless.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
A billion years is a long time, but it does not mean a lot of time overcomes
all issues. I don't know why you think having a lot of time is enough to
have life start, and if necessary have it start over and over again. Time
isn't an answer to all problems, it is timing that matters! If you have all the
necessary parts but they are all not together at an ...[text shortened]... art, then all bets are off and all the
randomness I concern myself with are meaningless.
Kelly

I heard one person say that a kiss turning a frog into a prince is a fairy tale,
but time turning a frog into a prince is the science of evolution.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I heard one person say that a kiss turning a frog into a prince is a fairy tale,
but time turning a frog into a prince is the science of evolution.

ROFL
Never heard that before.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
So in a lifeless world, you are saying all the ingredients were in the right
place, at the right time, under the right perpetual conditions, in the right
quantities, they will be setup properly (right/left handed), they will brought
together without ruining any of the ingredients around them that are
necessary, with enough food to continue the process throughout time
without anything going wrong to end this process?

Well, no, I'm fairly certain a lot has gone wrong in the process. What christians attribute
to a fallen creation, I consider the result of a gradual, blind natural process. You can't
seriously look at the natural world (our biological makeup), and think nothing went wrong
in the process.

Incidently, for the vast majority of life forms that ever existed, evidence shows that not just
did it go wrong, but so wrong that it ended the existence of those forms of life. You say the
flood did it, but there are just too many problems with the flood hypothesis to take it
seriously.

Originally posted by KellyJay
With respect to errors in typing a simple message. It should let each of us
know that it isn't simple to type a simple message, yet there are those of
us who gladly believe that life could just happen without someone either
guiding the process, or simply creating it.
Kelly

I've already mentioned that no matter how much you, RJ and friends wish to believe that
DNA is like a written word with instructions for building life, it's not. To say that it is, is to
use an analogy, a figure of speech, but it's really just a nucleic acid; a molecule made of
molecules that can bond naturally under the right conditions, which would make life as we
know it inevitable in the world as we know it.

Now, I'm fine with someone saying: "I believe that my god created these conditions",
because we can't explain exactly how these conditions came about yet, but I think it's quite
a leap to suggest that life could only have come about through divine creation.

Originally posted by KellyJay
A billion years is a long time, but it does not mean a lot of time overcomes
all issues. I don't know why you think having a lot of time is enough to
have life start, and if necessary have it start over and over again. Time
isn't an answer to all problems, it is timing that matters! If you have all the
necessary parts but they are all not together at an ...[text shortened]... art, then all bets are off and all the
randomness I concern myself with are meaningless.
Kelly

If you throw two dice and get six and five, and then keep throwing those dice, in time you're
going to get six and five again. If you have the ingredients for life in large quantities in a
limited space (such as the bottom of the oceans), sooner or later the right ingredients will
mix. What are the odds that just the right conditions would occur at just the right time?
Astronomical, no doubt. But then again, if you take two dice and throw them a hundred
times, what are the odds that if you throw them a hundred more times you would get the
exact same sequence? Astronomical, yet you did get that sequence that one time. All you
need is for life to start once, since once you have the basic cell structure, it's really, really
hard to stop the process of life. Oh, and did I mention that on a primordial earth, you would
have a lot more than just those two dice, so to speak.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I heard one person say that a kiss turning a frog into a prince is a fairy tale,
but time turning a frog into a prince is the science of evolution.

Hate to destroy a perfectly funny joke, but time never turned a frog into a prince. Usually, I'd
just have a laugh and let it slide, but with you creationists I feel the need to be abundantly
clear. You might actually believe that statement is a knock-down joke against evolution.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I heard one person say that a kiss turning a frog into a prince is a fairy tale,
but time turning a frog into a prince is the science of evolution.

The funniest part of all this is that you and Kelly believe that changes in life forms actually happen much faster than scientists believe it happens. You believe that most of the variety we see today happened in the last few thousand years since the flood whereas scientist think it it took far longer.
You know perfectly well that this creates a contradiction in your stance which is why you insist on calling such rapid change 'adaptation' instead of 'evolution' because you think that will lessen the problem some how.

Originally posted by twhitehead
The funniest part of all this is that you and Kelly believe that changes in life forms actually happen much faster than scientists believe it happens. You believe that most of the variety we see today happened in the last few thousand years since the flood whereas scientist think it it took far longer.
You know perfectly well that this creates a contradi ...[text shortened]... nge 'adaptation' instead of 'evolution' because you think that will lessen the problem some how.

You can believe it or not, but there are many scientists that basically believe the same thing about the creation. I give references for that information, but you would not know, because I believe you are one of those that do not look at Youtube videos, because you are afraid you might get some education. The scientific information I present here doesn't come out my hind end regardless of what other non-believers on here say.

Reproductive variations, adaptions, and a few mutations within species is all that is really happening. But even some of the scientists that I reference will compromise by calling that micro-evolution and what doesn't happen as macro-evolution. I would rather call macro-evolution "EVIL-LUTION."

Originally posted by C Hess
Hate to destroy a perfectly funny joke, but time never turned a frog into a prince. Usually, I'd
just have a laugh and let it slide, but with you creationists I feel the need to be abundantly
clear. You might actually believe that statement is a knock-down joke against evolution.

It doesn't matter if it is an amoeba, a fish, a rat, a monkey, or whatever that is changed into a man. The only real difference between the two fairy tales is that the KISS is replaced by TIME. TIME that you can't check on is the magic spell that makes evolution a science instead of just another fairy tale.

Originally posted by C Hess
Well, no, I'm fairly certain a lot has gone wrong in the process. What christians attribute
to a fallen creation, I consider the result of a gradual, blind natural process. You can't
seriously look at the natural world (our biological makeup), and think nothing went wrong
in the process.

Incidently, for the vast majority of life forms that ever exist ...[text shortened]... d did it, but there are just too many problems with the flood hypothesis to take it
seriously.

What went wrong? We have not even gotten to the point as far as I'm
concern that you can show me how the first living cell came about! If you
want to jump into the vast array of life we have now and ponder its
misfortune I'd say go for it, we have left the discussion on how life began to
look at it now. When I discuss the start of life with a non-believer I never
bring up God or the scriptures, since they reject both out of hand what
good would it do. If you want to discuss scripture instead of all the things
against life forming from non-life we can.

Typically, what occurs is that if I point out what I dislike about many
theories about how life began the fall back position is bring up scripture
and dismiss the discussion. I don't have to bring up God or the Bible, they
both will be brought up without me more times than not as far as I'm
concern to get out of discussion we were in.
Kelly

Originally posted by RJHinds
So that means you don't believe Jesus. So how can you call yourself a Christian and not believe in what Jesus said about the creation?

Mark 10:6-9 King James Version (KJV)

[b] But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one ...[text shortened]... r confidence in the power of God. Six days is the truth that shows the mighty power of our God.

No, it doesn't mean I don't believe Jesus.

It does mean that I don't think the passage you cite means what YOU think it means.

Good grief, you miss my point.

I can't say anything to you that you will listen to until you begin to see my point here, Ron. You think everything is just the way YOU think it is, and it can't be any other way.

By the way, the mighty power of God is evident in that He created all that we see at all. He shouldn't have to do it in 6 days just to impress us. My faith and belief in God is not diminished in any way by realizing He took billions of years to do it. What is time to God?? Those who believe get it, those who do not believe don't. Simple as that.

Originally posted by C Hess
I've already mentioned that no matter how much you, RJ and friends wish to believe that
DNA is like a written word with instructions for building life, it's not. To say that it is, is to
use an analogy, a figure of speech, but it's really just a nucleic acid; a molecule made of
molecules that can bond naturally under the right conditions, which would ma ...[text shortened]... s quite
a leap to suggest that life could only have come about through divine creation.

Okay, so DNA isn't the blue print of life. Exactly how does the body know
how to form itself? Why does the body put the heart where it goes, and
keeps it in the shape it needs to be in? How does the body know how thick
or thin our blood needs to be, or the how to form our arteries and veins, not
to mention blood clotting monitoring so we don't bleed out, or have our
blood clot while travelling through our bodies in a huge oops, there are
mighty fine start stops instructions coming from somewhere!? Where do the
instructions come from that give our bones form? How does it work that
there are two different sexes that have body parts that just happen to have
what the other needs to make it all work in such a grand way!
I'll let you explain it, since you don't believe instructions are used.
Kelly