My Favorite (to date) take down of Creationism.

[_Gunnar]

Having just watched Albert Mohler's YouTube presentation, I have to say I am far from favorably impressed. It is a prime example of the egregiously dishonest circular reasoning that turned me off from religion in the first place. He reveals undisguised contempt for scientific evidence that conflicts with his view of Biblical inerrancy. Basically he says we must accept the Bible because it is the word of God. How does he know it is the word of God? Because the Bible says so, according to him. How can we know the Bible is correct when it says claims to be the word of God? Because it is the word of God! I submit that he has no firmer basis for that claim than for the claim that the Bhagavad Gita or the Upanishads are the word of God.

He is offended by the idea that death could have come into the world prior to the existence of Adam and Eve without being the result of sin. The truth is that death is an inextricable part of the biological processes of life and reproduction. It is mathematically impossible to have both continuing reproduction and immortality for very long. If living organisms reproduced indefinitely and nothing ever died, the total number of living organisms would exceed the total number of fundamental particles (protons, neutrons, electrons, etc.) in the observable universe in much less time than even the 6000 years that YECs claim the earth has been in existence. According to cosmologists the maximum estimated number of fundamental particles in the observable universe is around 1 x 10^85. Thus if we start out with one breeding pair of immortal organisms (humans, for example) and they increase in number at a rate as low as 5% per year (which would be ridiculously easy to achieve if no one ever died), their total number would exceed the present total number of fundamental particles in the observable universe in only about 4010 years, if none of them ever died. If the above cited number under estimated the actual number by a factor of one million, this would only add about 280 years to the time required to exceed that number, due to the exponential nature of unrestricted population growth. This is obviously impossible. Thus either they had to refrain from reproducing or death would inevitably have to come into the world shortly after its creation.

[_LittleNipper]

Having just watched Albert Mohler's YouTube presentation, I have to say I am far from favorably impressed. It is a prime example of the egregiously dishonest circular reasoning that turned me off from religion in the first place. He reveals undisguised contempt for scientific evidence that conflicts with his view of Biblical inerrancy. Basically he says we must accept the Bible because it is the word of God. How does he know it is the word of God? Because the Bible says so, according to him. How can we know the Bible is correct when it says claims to be the word of God? Because it is the word of God! I submit that he has no firmer basis for that claim than for the claim that the Bhagavad Gita or the Upanishads are the word of God.

He is offended by the idea that death could have come into the world prior to the existence of Adam and Eve without being the result of sin. The truth is that death is an inextricable part of the biological processes of life and reproduction. It is mathematically impossible to have both continuing reproduction and immortality for very long. If living organisms reproduced indefinitely and nothing ever died, the total number of living organisms would exceed the total number of fundamental particles (protons, neutrons, electrons, etc.) in the observable universe in much less time than even the 6000 years that YECs claim the earth has been in existence. According to cosmologists the maximum estimated number of fundamental particles in the observable universe is around 1 x 10^85. Thus if we start out with one breeding pair of immortal organisms (humans, for example) and they increase in number at a rate as low as 5% per year (which would be ridiculously easy to achieve if no one ever died), their total number would exceed the present total number of fundamental particles in the observable universe in only about 4010 years, if none of them ever died. If the above cited number under estimated the actual number by a factor of one million, this would only add about 280 years to the time required to exceed that number, due to the exponential nature of unrestricted population growth. This is obviously impossible. Thus either they had to refrain from reproducing or death would inevitably have to come into the world shortly after its creation.

The following explains my position. Please read http://www.pinchercreekecho.com/2011/02 ... y-creation
If one is a CHRISTIAN, one is brought to many realizations. The fact is that either one believes in Christ and grows in that understanding, or one walks away and believes something different. We have no idea how GOD intended to use the entire Universe. And we do not know if God intended an unlimited number of births --- if any at all originally. God did allow a birth process to offset the death process established by the FALL and even that is now under the manipulation of a FALLEN world -- presently still controlled by Satan. As a Christian, Christ naturally comes FIRST! There is no experiment I can perform to replicate a sinless world. Even my own thoughts are jaded as your own reflect. I believe Jesus is the Christ (Messiah). And I believe what HE said and revealed to HIS Apostles.

With GOD nothing is impossible! Without GOD man must realize his own limitations or die in his own misguided misunderstanding.

[_SteelHead]

There is a Utube video , Albert Mohler, why does the universe look so old.

Because i am old and lazy I have not learned to post a link. I suspect using utubes search you could find this if you actually want to review it. Mr Mohler is an up and coming leader of the group he is involved in and is committed to defending yec. He has studied enough to discouver that the universe really does look like it is old. It is not just a matter of science following assumptions to avoid god.

There is an explanation proposed. I am summerizing but I do not thnk badly. Much of the presentation is focused upon the necessessity of maintaining a literal interpretation in order not to lose the authority of scripture. But the world really does look old.......

The answer is that it looks old because God made it to look old and he is good and making things the way he wants to.

though I am completely not a young earth creationist. (I am a very old earth creationist) I know of no logical proof against this argument. So it could be, maybe, sort of.

But I have a very strong objection to this argument. It makes God a liar and a deceiver. I believe God is truth and does not deceive. Creation is a window into his heart. The universe looks old because it transparently is old.

God playing the role of the deceiver. Then satan is god?

[_ludwigm]

God playing the role of the deceiver. Then satan is god?

- [#img] http://img1.indafoto.hu/10/1/57091_6715 ... 86ab_m.jpg[/img] -

[_The CCC]

The universe is expanding; stars, and planets forming, and ending; galaxies colliding. The whole process of creation, and destruction, has been going on for some 13.55 billion years, and will end some 100,000 trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion years from now. God is still God and this is how he works.

[_The CCC]

Was Adam created with a navel? I would say as the prototype for humanity, Adam likely had a bellybutton. Does that make God a deceiver? Absolutely not. Man deceives himself and tries to blame God. Adam tried it and Eve tried it. Read the Genesis account of the FALL. Man always tries to blame GOD for his own mistakes.

No Adam blamed Eve, and Eve claimed that Satan deceived her. The God I worship doesn't deceive his children.

[Guest]

The following explains my position. Please read http://www.pinchercreekecho.com/2011/02 ... y-creation
If one is a CHRISTIAN, one is brought to many realizations. The fact is that either one believes in Christ and grows in that understanding, or one walks away and believes something different. We have no idea how GOD intended to use the entire Universe. And we do not know if God intended an unlimited number of births --- if any at all originally. God did allow a birth process to offset the death process established by the FALL and even that is now under the manipulation of a FALLEN world -- presently still controlled by Satan. As a Christian, Christ naturally comes FIRST! There is no experiment I can perform to replicate a sinless world. Even my own thoughts are jaded as your own reflect. I believe Jesus is the Christ (Messiah). And I believe what HE said and revealed to HIS Apostles.

With GOD nothing is impossible! Without GOD man must realize his own limitations or die in his own misguided misunderstanding.

You still don't seem to understand the full implications of what I said, or even try to understand. If Adam and Eve and their descendants had remained in an immortal state, they would have had to stop procreating long, long before anyone in this generation was born to avoid crowding out everything else that exists in the entire universe, and you and I would never have existed to engage in this discussion. That is just a matter of simple, undeniable and irrevocable arithmetic.

I am fully aware of what your position is. No matter how many times you state it and no matter how many people you can find that corroborate it, it is still egregious nonsense.

And what do you mean by: "And we do not know if God intended an unlimited number of births --- if any at all originally?" Are you suggesting now that history could have unfolded in any way other than what God originally intended, or that God could have not known for sure what would happen? How does that not undermine the claims of God's omniscience and omnipotence? And again, if the original intent was not for Adam and Eve to have any offspring at all, and they had not "sinned", you and I would never have existed.

Be honest please! You believe what you believe, not because it is rational or has any evidential support, but because you can't bear the thought of it not being true.

[_huckelberry]

Having just watched Albert Mohler's YouTube presentation,

He is offended by the idea that death could have come into the world prior to the existence of Adam and Eve without being the result of sin. The truth is that death is an inextricable part of the biological processes of life and reproduction.

To think that there was death before Adam does create a pressure to rethink a few traditional assumptions.
On the other hand it is hard to think of something about history which is more sure than that there was death long long long before Adam and Eve.

[_Gunnar]

Having just watched Albert Mohler's YouTube presentation,

He is offended by the idea that death could have come into the world prior to the existence of Adam and Eve without being the result of sin. The truth is that death is an inextricable part of the biological processes of life and reproduction.

To think that there was death before Adam does create a pressure to rethink a few traditional assumptions.
On the other hand it is hard to think of something about history which is more sure than that there was death long long long before Adam and Eve.

Exactly right!

[_malkie]

God playing the role of the deceiver. Then satan is god?

- -