Creationism: Science or Pseudoscience? (philosophy)

[standing_on_one_foot]

Now where did you get the idea that they're absolutely certain? Pretty darn certain, yes, but absolutely? In science, almost nothing really is. And yes, it is, in itself, a result of science.

[Hope]

Hmmmm, perhaps I am just jumping to conclusions then---it's just that the times I've heard or read stuff concerning evolution by those who believe in it, it seems to be taken for granted that it's certain. But maybe that's just my experience.

[destined]

The question is not “Could God create everything in six days (144 hours)?” The answer to that question is: yes, absolutely! Followed up by this question, “What took you so long?” For I firmly believe that if God had chosen to do so He could have created everything instantly and in a fully completed and perfectly livable condition. However, the actual question we are dealing with here is “DID God create everything in six days (144 hours)?”


When we speak of "God" creating... I think that it is important to understand that the fundamental Christian view is that "God Himself" was the Creator.

It seems that we have an apparent contradiction... the God that is described as not being able to even "look upon sin" is down here and in a way "in touch" with the material world.


Could it be that just as Pharoe "created" the pyramids, that God "created" the universe and its matter??? And in the same way that Pharoe never touched a stone, that "God Himself" never touched a thing???

Upon further inspection of the word God (Elohim) in Genisis one will see that it can mean a few different things...

Definition

1. (plural)
   1. rulers, judges
   2. divine ones
   3. angels
   4. gods
2. (plural intensive - singular meaning)
   
   1. god, goddess
   2. godlike one
   3. works or special possessions of God
   4. the (true) God
   5. God

Translated Words KJV (2606) - GOD, 1; God, 2346; God-ward + (04136), 1; angels, 1; exceeding, 1; god, 244; goddess, 2; godly, 1; great, 2; judge, 5; mighty, 2;


The word elohim would be better translate as "manifold God" or "manifold God and His angels". Notice the last possible meaning of the word is as singular God, and this may have been added to the list due to the Church's interpretation of the Genisis account.

Ponder this... the word angel = messenger.
Since the world was SPOKEN into existence then the probablility of an angel, or angels, carrying this message could be good.

Thanks.

[HOGCALLER]

destined

I may not quite be following you.

There are those who say: God is everything and everything is God. And then there are those that claim to worship a God who suffers from multiple personality disorder (my words not theirs).

It occurs to me that your comments and questions are considerably off topic. However I would like to pursue this line of thought with you. If you would please, start your own thread and invite me to join.

[Mr Spinkles]

Hope-- I don't believe in evolution, I just believe in evidence. Show me the evidence for talking snakes and women being made out of ribs, and I'll show you the evidence that all living things come from living parents (they don't spontaneously appear out of thin air) and that descent with modification leads to speciation.

[Hope]

Originally Posted by Mr_Spinkles

Hope-- I don't believe in evolution, I just believe in evidence. Show me the evidence for talking snakes and women being made out of ribs, and I'll show you the evidence that all living things come from living parents (they don't spontaneously appear out of thin air) and that descent with modification leads to speciation.

I will grant you, Mr. Spinkles, that evolution happens to a certain degree. I won't argue about evidence of that. What bothers me is when some claim that evolution explains the origin of life itself, and the origin of vastly and completely different species. And they claim it as if it were fact, when in reality it is simply jumping to some wild conclusions, in my opinion. There are many scientists who disagree with what I will call 'mainstream evolutionism', because they see its many fallacies and holes. I totally respect your desire for evidence--i wish I could show you what you seek. But that's up to God--not to me!

[standing_on_one_foot]

Originally Posted by Hope

What bothers me is when some claim that evolution explains the origin of life itself

That would bother me quite a bit too, seeing as that particular interesting question is not in the least answered by evolution...

Now, the origin of vastly different species I don't see as wild conclusion jumping, but then, I think we have rather different views of the subject.

Although, really, after reading Good Omens, I'm rather fond of talking snakes.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Hope

There are many scientists who disagree with what I will call 'mainstream evolutionism', because they see its many fallacies and holes.

What many fallacies and holes?

[Mr Spinkles]

Originally Posted by Hope

There are many scientists who disagree with what I will call 'mainstream evolutionism', because they see its many fallacies and holes.

Yes, but how many go by the name Steve? http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/art..._2_16_2003.asp