Question to Creationists: What's the Mechanism?

[nPeace]

Magic is the temporary suspension of the the laws of nature, whereas a miracle is the temporary suspension of the laws of nature only that a believer in miracles believes a deity is somehow involved.
For this thread specific, magic (or if you want miracle) is a change in state that isn't and can't or won't be explained by breaking it down into atomic steps (which conform to the laws of nature).

When a stage magician shows us an empty hat, then performs a ritual and draws a rabbit out of the formerly empty hat, there are two explanations:
1. The rabbit was teleported by the ritual (not conform to the laws of nature).
2. The rabbit was always in the hat. Step 1: the magician made the hat so it optically looks empty. Step 2: while distracting us by the ritual he secretly removes the false bottom. Step 3: he pulls out the rabbit.


This is a clear example of case 1. A state of no life to a state of life and in between only a magical (miraculous) incantation. No explanation of atomic steps in between.

The Bible is not a science text book. It was not written to explain any mechanism of creation. So if that's what you are looking for, I didn't understand the OP, and should not have responded.
I apologize. I did not know.

 

[Jose Fly]

Thank you.
Which would mean that a skeptic can pick a verse and apply it poetically... if he / she wants, and a Christian can pick a verse, and apply it literally.

Why would anyone apply a poem literally?

Why would the skeptic apply every verse that would counter their argument in this way?
Why would the Christian apply the verse in a way that counters the skeptics' claim?

I dunno. I would just read it as it is...poetry. I don't read Emily Dickenson's poems in any sort of scientific context, so I don't know why folks would do the same with Isaiah's poems.

I am sure these are questions you and I will answer differently, but I believe where we may think we have the correct answer, we know, we are only dust.
That's where we go in a few years from now... possibly.

Yep, that's how I see it.

I say possibly, because I believe 1 John 5:17 to be literally true.
I believe this dust, is far from superior. I think you would agree, since the sun will continue to burn, regardless of how many billions walk to their grave.

Not sure what that specific verse has to do with dust, but I generally agree. If every H. sapien were suddenly wiped off the planet tomorrow, the universe wouldn't skip a beat.

I know there is a supreme being, and that one has the answers - knows all things. So it really doesn't matter what you or I think we know.
What is important, is what we know, imo.

I hope I have not confused you.

No problems.

 

[nPeace]

Why would anyone apply a poem literally?

HA HA.
This is exactly my point.
The skeptic will do everything in his power to guard his argument.
Not being a very good poker player, first he plays his Ace - he claims the stated fact is a poem, then he goes so far as to claim poems don't contain facts.
The thing is, he never sees the folly of his argument.

Why should the Christian take the side of a skeptic... I means who is he, and how does he play his hand?

The Christian knows what they know.
To use a famous expression of Jesus Christ... 'It is written'. God’s wrath is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in an unrighteous way, because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable. (Romans 1:18-20)
We know this.

I dunno. I would just read it as it is...poetry. I don't read Emily Dickenson's poems in any sort of scientific context, so I don't know why folks would do the same with Isaiah's poems.

Yup. Emily Dickenson poetry is the blueprint of all poetry.

Isaiah was not a poet. He was a prophet. What he said may have sounded poetic, but he spoke truth from God.

Think of Jesus' words. Jesus said, I am the bread that comes down from heaven. If you feed on this bread, you will not perish.' What Jesus said there was true, and he knew what he meant. Eventually his followers understood.
Does it mean everything Jesus said was illustrative? No.

Yep, that's how I see it.


Not sure what that specific verse has to do with dust, but I generally agree. If every H. sapien were suddenly wiped off the planet tomorrow, the universe wouldn't skip a beat.


No problems.

 

[viole]

I do forgive all those who read the Bible and don't understand a word of what they read. There are reasons for that.
So if you were to (not saying that you did, but it would not surprise me if some do) read that the water was on the earth before the earth was even formed, I understand.

So, we agree that water could not possibly exist before the stars, right? It might be that I misread, but it looks like the earth and water (all made of heavy elements) existed before the stars. Even before the sun.

A little two year old knows that circles are not spheres. They don't know that spheres are made up of circles, though.
That's a little too technical for them... which of course is understandable.
Scientist know this though... at least some of them

A flat plane is also made of circles. So, why did it say THE circle of the earth, and not A circle of the earth? And why make it so complicated? Why didn’t God simply say the sphere of the earth, instead of embarrassing His believers for centuries to come?

Ciao

- viole

 

[nPeace]

Magic is the temporary suspension of the the laws of nature, whereas a miracle is the temporary suspension of the laws of nature only that a believer in miracles believes a deity is somehow involved.
For this thread specific, magic (or if you want miracle) is a change in state that isn't and can't or won't be explained by breaking it down into atomic steps (which conform to the laws of nature).

When a stage magician shows us an empty hat, then performs a ritual and draws a rabbit out of the formerly empty hat, there are two explanations:
1. The rabbit was teleported by the ritual (not conform to the laws of nature).
2. The rabbit was always in the hat. Step 1: the magician made the hat so it optically looks empty. Step 2: while distracting us by the ritual he secretly removes the false bottom. Step 3: he pulls out the rabbit.


This is a clear example of case 1. A state of no life to a state of life and in between only a magical (miraculous) incantation. No explanation of atomic steps in between.

Here is something you might want to consider Heyo.
I can't quote the entire article, but it might do you well to read, at least the information under the subheading Are miracles compatible with natural law?
I'll just extract two excerpts.

Spoiler: Excerpts

However, capable scientists are becoming increasingly cautious about saying that a certain thing is impossible. Professor John R. Brobeck of the University of Pennsylvania stated: “A scientist is no longer able to say honestly something is impossible. He can only say it is improbable. But he may be able to say something is impossible to explain in terms of our present knowledge. Science cannot say that all properties of matter and all forms of energy are now known. . . . [For a miracle] one thing that needs to be added is a source of energy unknown to us in our biological and physiological sciences. In our Scriptures this source of energy is identified as the power of God.” (Time, July 4, 1955) Since this statement was made, further scientific development has made it more emphatic.
...How, then, can anyone say that God violated his own laws in performing powerful works that seemed amazing and miraculous to men? Surely the Creator of the physical universe has perfect control of that which he created and can maneuver these things within the framework of the laws he has made inherent in them. (Job 38) He can bring about the condition necessary for the performance of these works; he can speed up, slow down, modify, or neutralize reactions. Or angels, with greater power than man, can do so in carrying out Jehovah’s will.—Ex 3:2; Ps 78:44-49.

Something else you might want to consider doing, is listening to a scientists that specializes in building molecules - James Tour.
He explains that science actually helps him know how God did things.
Since you don't believe that energy transforming to matter is not magic, or miracle, why would you claim that God does magic, when he uses what you know, and since you have no knowledge of all the forms of energy out there (they don't even know what "Dark Energy" is), would that not make you and I a little infant, compared to the one that knows?

 

[nPeace]

So, we agree that water could not possibly exist before the stars, right? It might be that I misread, but it looks like the earth and water (all made of heavy elements) existed before the stars. Even before the sun.

It looks that way to a superficial reader, yes.

A flat plane is also made of circles. So, why did it say THE circle of the earth, and not A circle of the earth?

That's simple viole. Just stand 20 feet in the air and look down on a bowling ball. tell me what you see.

And why make it so complicated? Why didn’t God simply say the sphere of the earth, instead of embarrassing His believers for centuries to come?

Ciao

- viole

Why make it complicated?
A 5 year old is so adept at using a cell phone, they put some of us to shame. Tell them the cell phone is complicated, and they go, "Whhhaaat. Something wrong with you my man."

What's complicated to you, is not to others.
Now consider why the child knows, and we don't. Any idea?
Ah. They learn. They become familiar.

God is not a baby that he should be commanded to spoon feed us everything we want. Let's put in a bit of effort, and couple it with some honesty, and humility, like a child, and we will hunger and thirst no more.

Those who are blind, are that way for a reason.
What did jesus say... "Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.” - Matthew 15:14

What did Paul say...  "If, in fact, the good news we declare is veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through." - 2 Corinthians 4:3, 4
Why?
"That is why God lets a deluding influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness." - 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 12

It's actually a choice on our part viole. God is doing a sifting work, just as we would sift flour, to capture the weevils', or any 'undesirables'. The fine flower will be accepted, The unwanted weevils will be trapped in the sift, to be gotten rid of permanently.

That's why viole.

It's all written in the Bible.
(John 6:44) No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him, and I will resurrect him on the last day.

It requires careful study and an honest heart, with a thirst for truth, and a willingness to follow that truth, above our own selfish desires.

 

[Jose Fly]

This is exactly my point.

Is it?

Isaiah was not a poet. He was a prophet. What he said may have sounded poetic, but he spoke truth from God.

This seems to contradict what you just said above. I said the verses quoted from Isaiah are clearly poetry and therefore shouldn't be read literally, you say that's exactly your point, but then you say Isaiah wasn't a poet.

Can you clarify?

 

[viole]

It looks that way to a superficial reader, yes.

Ok, how does a non superficial reader read that?

That's simple viole. Just stand 20 feet in the air and look down on a bowling ball. tell me what you see.

A circle. Not the circle. If you watch it from the left, it would be a different circle.

anyway, are you estimating the distance God has from us? I heard we look like ants from His position, which could be used o calculate His height, by triangulation. He is awfully close.

Why make it complicated?
A 5 year old is so adept at using a cell phone, they put some of us to shame. Tell them the cell phone is complicated, and they go, "Whhhaaat. Something wrong with you my man."

Are you telling us that people, ergo beings in the image of God, are like children incapable of understanding what a sphere is? By symmetry, the conclusion is that not even God knows what a sphere is.

wouldn’t you agree?

ciao

- viole

 

[Heyo]

Since you don't believe that energy transforming to matter is not magic, or miracle, why would you claim that God does magic, when he uses what you know, and since you have no knowledge of all the forms of energy out there (they don't even know what "Dark Energy" is), would that not make you and I a little infant, compared to the one that knows?

There is nothing in physics that does say that energy can't transform into matter. In fact, the most known equation in physics, E=mc², states the equivalence of energy and matter. (And it states that you need a lot of energy to form matter.)
But neither you nor anybody else has proposed a form of energy matter transformation to explain speciation. That means that the ToE is still the only (non-magical) explanation for speciation.

 

[nPeace]

Is it?


This seems to contradict what you just said above. I said the verses quoted from Isaiah are clearly poetry and therefore shouldn't be read literally, you say that's exactly your point, but then you say Isaiah wasn't a poet.

Can you clarify?

Did you deliberately misunderstand what i said was my point?

 

[Jose Fly]

Did you deliberately misunderstand what i said was my point?

No, that's why I asked if you could clarify. Can you?

 

[nPeace]

Ok, how does a non superficial reader read that?

Read the scriptures to understand it. Read it in a complete way, without cherry picking one part, and excluding it from the rest. etc.

A circle. Not the circle. If you watch it from the left, it would be a different circle.

Okay. Tell me why you say "a", amd not "the". Is it because you don't know what you have in mind specifically?

anyway, are you estimating the distance God has from us? I heard we look like ants from His position, which could be used o calculate His height, by triangulation. He is awfully close.

No. I just used an example. distance does not matter to God, and does not affect what he sees. His "eyes" are not like ours. Darkness is like light to him, according to the Bible, so hopefully that helps you understand a bit.

Are you telling us that people, ergo beings in the image of God, are like children incapable of understanding what a sphere is? By symmetry, the conclusion is that not even God knows what a sphere is.

Huh?

wouldn’t you agree?

ciao

- viole

Huh?

 

[nPeace]

No, that's why I asked if you could clarify. Can you?

Sorry. no I will not. Please take what I said, as one, and stop breaking it apart, and separating parts. It's a violation of the rules... and unethical.

 

[Jose Fly]

Sorry. no I will not.

Well then you can't complain about being misunderstood.

Please take what I said, as one, and stop breaking it apart, and separating parts. It's a violation of the rules... and unethical.

What rule?

 

[nPeace]

There is nothing in physics that does say that energy can't transform into matter. In fact, the most known equation in physics, E=mc², states the equivalence of energy and matter. (And it states that you need a lot of energy to form matter.)
But neither you nor anybody else has proposed a form of energy matter transformation to explain speciation. That means that the ToE is still the only (non-magical) explanation for speciation.

Oh. Is this about the ToE?
Can I suggest that you be more upfront with your OP, so that in future I will know what you are discussing.
(Isaiah 40:26) “Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who brings out their army by number; He calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power, Not one of them is missing.
God transformed energy into matter. that's where what we see came from.

 

[nPeace]

Well then you can't complain about being misunderstood.


What rule?

Take care.

 

[viole]

Read the scriptures to understand it. Read it in a complete way, without cherry picking one part, and excluding it from the rest. etc.

I did. It says stars come after water. Quite clearly. Now what?

Okay. Tell me why you say "a", amd not "the". Is it because you don't know what you have in mind specifically?

I wonder why He did not say sphere.Every idiot understand what a sphere is.

No. I just used an example. distance does not matter to God, and does not affect what he sees. His "eyes" are not like ours. Darkness is like light to him, according to the Bible, so hopefully that helps you understand a bit.

I am afraid not. Apparently He destroyed Babel on account of getting to close to Him. So, He appears to be quite concerned with social distancing.

Huh?

huh what? That we are not like children not understanding what a sphere is?

ciao

- viole

 

[Jose Fly]

Take care.

 

[Heyo]

Oh. Is this about the ToE?

1. This OP was published in the forum "Evolution vs. Creationism".
2. The title addresses creationists and asks for a mechanism.
3. In the body I specified mechanism for speciation.

Is it really that hard to conclude from the above points that it is about what creationism has put forth against the Theory of Evolution?

 

[nPeace]

I did. It says stars come after water. Quite clearly. Now what?

You did what? Read the Bible, and not cherry pick parts and separate then? No you didn't. You would have to be more super than The Flash, and Superman, to do that.

However, if you read Genesis 1:3-5 and still conclude what you have, then the "now what" query is answered in the later part of this post.

I wonder why He did not say sphere.Every idiot understand what a sphere is.

Okay then.

I am afraid not. Apparently He destroyed Babel on account of getting to close to Him. So, He appears to be quite concerned with social distancing.

Um Um Um.

huh what? That we are not like children not understanding what a sphere is?

ciao

- viole

Cool.