Boyle Boils Evolutionists

[tifforo1]

If you go talk to the people who actually work in thermodynamics and fluid dynamics, they can tell you that this has very little to do with whether evolution occurred or not and does nothing to rule out that possibility.

[BereanBeacon1]

@tifforo1 Well, I am sure they have real science which we creationists are very interested in. But then evolutionists do the bait and switch and slip in science fiction.

[slicingwater]

That didn't explain anything about how Boyle's theories boil Evolutionist. And Boyle should have known better. As a scientist he runs the risks of discovering things that do not conform to his world view. he should be prepared for that.

[Sgrunterundt]

It is not strange that Boyle was a christian, almost all europeans were at the time. Its no secret. However as science progressed we found out more and more that didn't fit with (a literal interpretation of) the bible.

Today with all we know about cosmology, geology and biology, we have to say that if there was a creator then he either does not have much to do with the christian image of god (or any other gods for that matter), or he has been deliberately trying to mislead us.

[jondulars]

Daniel 9:25

Research this prophecy!

Exactly 173,880 days of this prophecy JESUS rode into Jerusalem. AMAZING!

We are at the door of the end. If this passes then throw it all out!

[PraiseYeshua]

Best Creation Moments clip so far!!! Thanks for sharing :)

[jamesjeffreypaul]

Why can't God have used evolution to bring His creation into being? What's wrong with that?

[vbirdieb]

Because man is in the image of God. Are you really going to say that Apes, monkeys and the like is the image of God? And that Adam couldn't have named the animals as God said He did? It basicly turns God and the whole Bible into a lie, that's why.

Our understanding may be bad, but God is no lier.

[sordid8apple6pie]

What race is God? If man was created in the image of God, and the image is meant to imply physical as opposed to spiritual, one race must resemble him more than any other.

[vbirdieb]

God isn't a race, but Jesus was born into the line of David. And truth be known I really don't care what race it was. The only thing that matters is what God commands and has told us through His prophets and Jesus. Jesus being the most important, since He is God and the son (God in flesh). If it's that important to you, you'll have to ask God. But then why would Jesus come to save the whole world if race mattered??

[sordid8apple6pie]

You're discussing the subject of "the image of God." If apes, monkey and the like aren't the image of God, then that leads to a question as to whether one race most resembles God.

Given that his image is sufficiently well-defined that it can't be an ape, wouldn't it then follow that his image is sufficiently well-defined to have a race?

The easiest argument could be made that God imbues any intelligence with a soul, an aspect that most reflects his image.

[vbirdieb]

Right, but Genesis 1:26 And God said let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepth upon the earth.

And we do have dominion, don't we.? Anything less than us wouldn't have enough intelligence to have dominion.  But according to evolution we were apes for our begining, not enough intelligence to rule over all the earth.

[sordid8apple6pie]

Dominion is actually a mistranslation. It's meant to be stewardship.

But I see your point. It would appear that evolution is not consistent with the literal word of the bible.

Then again, Genesis 1:16 "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also."

The moon isn't a light; the light from the moon is actually from the sun, so the moon is actually more of a mirror than a light.

Perhaps literalism isn't the way.

[vbirdieb]

"the moon is actually more of a mirror than a light." There's a dark side to the moon, and if the stars aren't covered by the clouds there's still light. So even if the moon is reflecting the sun, it still acts as a lesser light and rules the night. So it is a lesser light, because it's a reflection. Do you see what I mean?

[sordid8apple6pie]

Ah, but by a literal interpretation, it's not a light. It's a reflector.

[vbirdieb]

Well, How would you create a lesser light that wouldn't be too bright? You may disagree but the moon is literally a lesser light, because it only reflects.  It's pretty ingenous to create and put a object (moon) at just the right place to reflect light, but not too much. Either way He created it and placed it to be our moon.

[sordid8apple6pie]

Ah, but if you're willing to interpret it non-literally (you may disagree, but that is literally what you are doing) for some passages, but not in others... Isn't that a tad too hypocritical?

[vbirdieb]

Jesus spoke in parables. God used images to represent different things in visions. So, no it's not. It's reconizing that it doesn't have to be a literal light to still be a lesser light.  God's wisdom isn't like ours, His understanding is beyond ours. cont....

[sordid8apple6pie]

So, similarly, God needn't have created us just as we are in order for the words of the bible to be true. To be made in his image needn't necessarily mean that we were made instantaneously as we are now. It could mean that he gave us our souls, which are of his essence, and we grew into them.

A light is a light source, not a reflection of a source. When it says that God created two lights, it really means he made billions, with one in our solar system and a reflector in our moon.

[vbirdieb]

Is it possible that we are a variation of the original man? Yes, just like there are variaties of birds, etc.. But only within the species itself, not from ape's. We started out better than what we are now. The only thing that can save us is God.

[sordid8apple6pie]

The varieties of birds are separate species, just as humans are a separate species of ape. =)

[vbirdieb]

Their still birds. You can tell their birds, their not so physically different, that you would have to look for some missing link, to prove their birds. Humans have always been human. We were physically stronger, and smarter. We have gone down hill not up. =)

[sordid8apple6pie]

You don't need to find a missing link to connect humans to other apes. The "missing link" is an attempt to highlight evolutionary origin, not relatedness. Genetics does a sufficient job of proving the connectedness of humans to other animal species. Like the 99% similarity between the genes of a chimpanzee and the genes of a human. This is more genetically similar than most birds are to each other. For instance, a penguin to a sparrow.

[vbirdieb]

You find enough similarity between almost all life on this planet. Why? It only makes sense to use the same basic ingredents, but the little differences make a big difference in what a creature is, and the biggest difference between us and animals.? Humans were made in His likeness, both physical and with the breath of life, soul, spirit, that is unlike the rest of creation. We communicated with God, walked with God, I can't see God conversing with a chimp and still be in His likeness....??

[sordid8apple6pie]

If this is the lens through which you view the world, then I find myself content that it works for you.

[sordid8apple6pie]

After all, a light is a source not a reflector. God is intelligent enough to acknowledge the distinction.

[vbirdieb]

God's knowledge is beyond ours. So, When God said let there be light, but hadn't created the sun yet, do you take that as literal? I do, I just don't know how it's possible. He (God) doesn't say what He did with the first light neither, I don't think it makes him any less God just because He doesn't say. Just because the other light He created acts like a mirror, doesn't make it any less created, just not exactly what we expected. If it wasn't reflective it wouldn't provide any light.

[sordid8apple6pie]

I'm not exacting a critique of God. I'm exacting a critique of a literal interpretation of the Bible. Those things oughtn't be conflated. God is, after all, beyond us. To assume that creation can be condensed into text seems beyond rational.

[JTTNMinistries]

Because the Bible states otherwise and unless "god" is not the God of the Bible then this is impossible.

[YARTES2K8]

We are One. God is One. Al is One. Namaste. Blessings.

[DeaconDeZ]

First of all, He has done those very things! Secondly, who the heck are YOU that God needs to prove His existence to?! Talk about an ego-maniac! This is called Faith, my friend. That is the substance of things hoped for & the evidence of things not seen!

[tifforo1]

@DeaconDeZ

A being may not inherently have a duty to prove its existence, but it has a duty to do so before demanding belief in it.

[EbolaV1rus]

Say what you will. Believe what you want. But know this, you WILL confess that He is Lord, you WILL kneel before Him.

Romans 14:11

It is written: "'As surely as I live,' says the Lord, 'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.'"

The sad thing is, when that time comes, and you are looking upon His face, you will realize that all of your entire life you have been wrong. And in that second, that very moment, you will wish you could take it all back.

[EbolaV1rus]

But by then, it will be too late. He will look at you with sadness in His eyes, and say "I never knew you"

Accept Jesus into your heart and your life today. Confess with your mouth that He died for your sins, and confess that He was raised from the dead. There is nothing that you have said or done, that cannot be forgiven.