Arguments Creationists Should Stop Using

[TB2]

We're already fools for Christ (which I'm okay with). There's no need to be fools for foolishness sake. There's so much misinformation flying around the internet, making it so easy to succumb to sensationalistic hype, hoaxes, and false claims. Creationists have unfortunately contributed to this, but even they will tell you a lot of these claims are false. So creationists, please at least listen to what arguments even the lead creationist ministries and organizations say you should avoid (like ICR, Answers in Genesis, International Creation Ministries).

Arguments creationists should not use:

International Creation Ministries page

Answers in Genesis page

Arguments we think creationists should NOT use​

Table of contents​

• Which arguments should definitely not be used?​

  • Darwin recanted on his deathbed
  • Moon-Dust thickness proves a young moon
  • NASA computers, in calculating the positions of planets, found a missing day and 40 minutes
  • NASA faked the moon landings
  • The earth is flat
  • Woolly mammoths were snap frozen during the Flood catastrophe
  • Castenedolo and Calaveras human remains in ‘old’ strata invalidate the geologic column
  • Dubois renounced Java man as a “missing link” and claimed it was just a giant gibbon
  • The Japanese trawler Zuiyo Maru caught a dead plesiosaur near New Zealand
  • The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics began at the Fall
  • If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes today?
  • Women have one more rib than men
  • Archaeopteryx is a fraud
  • There are no beneficial mutations
  • No new species have been produced
  • Earth’s axis was vertical before the Flood
  • Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed
  • Archaeologists have found skeletons (and footprints) of giant human beings
  • Darwin’s quote about the absurdity of eye evolution from Origin of Species.
  • Earth’s division in the days of Peleg (Genesis 10:25) refers to catastrophic splitting of the continents
  • There are gaps in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 so the Earth may be 10,000 years old or even more
  • Jesus cannot have inherited genetic material from Mary, otherwise He would have inherited original sin
  • Laminin: an amazing look at how Jesus is holding each of us together
  • Light was created in transit
  • The phrase ‘science falsely so called’ in 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) refers to evolution
  • Geocentrism (in the classical sense of taking the Earth as an absolute reference frame) is taught by Scripture and Heliocentrism is anti-Scriptural
  • Ron Wyatt has found Noah’s Ark
  • Wyatt has found much archaeological proof of the Bible
  • Many of Carl Baugh’s creation ‘evidences’
  • Missing solar neutrinos prove that the sun shines by gravitational collapse, and is proof of a young sun
  • Einstein held unswervingly, against enormous peer pressure, to belief in a Creator
  • Canopy theory
  • God’s rainbow has seven colours; man’s rainbow has six

• What arguments are doubtful, hence inadvisable to use​

  • There are living dinosaurs today
  • There was no rain before the Flood
  • Natural selection as tautology
  • Evolution is just a theory
  • There is amazing modern scientific insight in the Bible
  • The Septuagint records the correct Genesis chronology
  • The speed of light has decreased over time
  • There are no transitional forms
  • Gold chains have been found in coal
  • Plate tectonics is fallacious
  • Creationists believe in microevolution but not macroevolution
  • The Gospel is in the stars

 

[CrowCross]

We're already fools for Christ (which I'm okay with). There's no need to be fools for foolishness sake. There's so much misinformation flying around the internet, making it so easy to succumb to sensationalistic hype, hoaxes, and false claims. Creationists have unfortunately contributed to this, but even they will tell you a lot of these claims are false. So creationists, please at least listen to what arguments even the lead creationist ministries and organizations say you should avoid (like ICR, Answers in Genesis, International Creation Ministries).

Arguments creationists should not use:

International Creation Ministries page

Answers in Genesis page

Arguments we think creationists should NOT use​

Table of contents​

• Which arguments should definitely not be used?​

  • Darwin recanted on his deathbed
  • Moon-Dust thickness proves a young moon
  • NASA computers, in calculating the positions of planets, found a missing day and 40 minutes
  • NASA faked the moon landings
  • The earth is flat
  • Woolly mammoths were snap frozen during the Flood catastrophe
  • Castenedolo and Calaveras human remains in ‘old’ strata invalidate the geologic column
  • Dubois renounced Java man as a “missing link” and claimed it was just a giant gibbon
  • The Japanese trawler Zuiyo Maru caught a dead plesiosaur near New Zealand
  • The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics began at the Fall
  • If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes today?
  • Women have one more rib than men
  • Archaeopteryx is a fraud
  • There are no beneficial mutations
  • No new species have been produced
  • Earth’s axis was vertical before the Flood
  • Paluxy tracks prove that humans and dinosaurs co-existed
  • Archaeologists have found skeletons (and footprints) of giant human beings
  • Darwin’s quote about the absurdity of eye evolution from Origin of Species.
  • Earth’s division in the days of Peleg (Genesis 10:25) refers to catastrophic splitting of the continents
  • There are gaps in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11 so the Earth may be 10,000 years old or even more
  • Jesus cannot have inherited genetic material from Mary, otherwise He would have inherited original sin
  • Laminin: an amazing look at how Jesus is holding each of us together
  • Light was created in transit
  • The phrase ‘science falsely so called’ in 1 Timothy 6:20 (KJV) refers to evolution
  • Geocentrism (in the classical sense of taking the Earth as an absolute reference frame) is taught by Scripture and Heliocentrism is anti-Scriptural
  • Ron Wyatt has found Noah’s Ark
  • Wyatt has found much archaeological proof of the Bible
  • Many of Carl Baugh’s creation ‘evidences’
  • Missing solar neutrinos prove that the sun shines by gravitational collapse, and is proof of a young sun
  • Einstein held unswervingly, against enormous peer pressure, to belief in a Creator
  • Canopy theory
  • God’s rainbow has seven colours; man’s rainbow has six

• What arguments are doubtful, hence inadvisable to use​

  • There are living dinosaurs today
  • There was no rain before the Flood
  • Natural selection as tautology
  • Evolution is just a theory
  • There is amazing modern scientific insight in the Bible
  • The Septuagint records the correct Genesis chronology
  • The speed of light has decreased over time
  • There are no transitional forms
  • Gold chains have been found in coal
  • Plate tectonics is fallacious
  • Creationists believe in microevolution but not macroevolution
  • The Gospel is in the stars

Looks like they left out Noah's ark.

 

[TB2]

Looks like they left out Noah's ark.

See sixth or seventh bullet point from both of first list has Ron Wyatt Noah's Ark discovery claim

 

[CrowCross]

See sixth or seventh bullet point from both of first list has Ron Wyatt Noah's Ark discovery claim

I'd use the no transitional fossil argument anytime.

No benificial mutations....pretty much a valid argument....especially to the point that a second, third, fourth, etc. so called beneficial mutation is required to occur in and change the DNA of an animals progeny...over and over again, many, many times to the point a new body part or apendage is realzed.

Dino tracks and humans tracks..or even human tracks in the same strata that dinsaurs are in have been found.
The Delp tracks were not carved.

The earth is flat...well that ones a no brainer. I suspect you might argue the world is flat.

I don't intend to do the whole list.

 

[TB2]

I'd use the no transitional fossil argument anytime

It's not valid to say there are no transitional forms at all. Please see, "THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS!!!"???" But what you can say is that Darwinian gradualism is by and large a failed prediction (and a scientific theory is only as good as the accuracy of its predictions), and that ~97-98% of the time we don't find intermediates.

 

[TB2]

No benificial mutations....pretty much a valid argument....especially to the point that a second, third, fourth, etc. so called beneficial mutation is required to occur in and change the DNA of an animals progeny...over and over again, many, many times to the point a new body part or apendage is realzed

Both beneficial and lethal mutations are rarely fixed in genomes. The evidence currently supports the "Nearly Neutral Theory" of molecular biology. The vast majority of mutations are neutral in terms of fitness or nearly so.

Dino tracks and humans tracks..or even human tracks in the same strata that dinsaurs are in have been found

We just don't have credible evidence. I thought it was so convincing too. My YEC geology professors showed me how the claims don't meet standards of proof.

 

[CrowCross]

It's not valid to say there are no transitional forms at all. Please see, "THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS!!!"???" But what you can say is that Darwinian gradualism is by and large a failed prediction (and a scientific theory is only as good as the accuracy of its predictions), and that ~97-98% of the time we don't find intermediates.

The only thing I would consider as being a transitional form is the fossil dug up showing an animals de-evolution. Something such as Archy or a photo-whale...well, no. Evolutionism doesn't have the ability to enhance a species where the DNA has an increase in information via descent with modification where a fish can eventually evolve into a mammal.

The bible tells us God made the animals so they reproduce after their own kinds...That is using mans taxonomic ranking system an animal won't evolve past species or Genus.....ESPECIALLY on the level the evo tell us it has happened.

 

[CrowCross]

Both beneficial and lethal mutations are rarely fixed in genomes. The evidence currently supports the "Nearly Neutral Theory" of molecular biology. The vast majority of mutations are neutral in terms of fitness or nearly so.

We just don't have credible evidence. I thought it was so convincing too. My YEC geology professors showed me how the claims don't meet standards of proof.

There is a lot of evidence that showed humans and dinosaurs were contemporaneous.

Of course we are taught that dino's died out 65 MY's ago...and humans evolved 4 My's or so ago...so that would be impossible. Right? No reason to even look into the possibility. In fact if you even suggest it you're mocked...even fired in some instances due to your ignorance of "true" science.

Even the bible confirms it....yet many "christians" have been indoctrinated into this evo teaching they find a way to change what the bible says.
Funny thing about "christians".....they can believe the science when they are told it's impossible...YET...when the same scientist tell us Christ Jesus resurrection was also scientifically impossible...they can believe a dead man could come back to life on day 3.

To those "christians" I say....get off the fence.

 

[TB2]

I will share my perspective on Pre-Flood artifacts and human-dino coexistence claims using the infamous "Malachite Man" as an example.

Due to my interest in science combined with my strict Young Earth Creationism (YEC) upbringing, I had a steady diet of YEC books, and articles and videos that I devoured. I don't know much about the psychology of conspiracies, but I suspect at least part of the appeal is to our morality and sense of justice, right and wrong. We feel moral outrage at the thought of truth suppression, and feed on it.

I certainly did. I was outraged at all the accounts I was told of 'evil' atheistic secular evolutionary scientists who actively suppressed the truth about God and the scientific truth as well. For example, I was outraged about all the antedelluvian evidence that showed humans coexisting with dinosaurs before the Flood that evolutionists were suppressing, hiding, and even destroying. And I had the photos to prove it. Indisputable, conclusive proof: iron axes encased in supposedly million year old sediments, side by side dino and human footprints, a human finger bone, giant footprints (made by the Nephilim, of course), even a beveled stone wall in Cretaceous age sediment. An entire Pre-Flood civilization an evolutionists knew about but were suppressing the truth.

And then there was the "Malachite Man," which was actually two human skeletons. I learned about it from a guest YEC speaker at church. In addition to photos of all the pre-Flood items above (and then some), he showed photos of two human skeletons that were discovered in a strip mine Utah. They were encased in situ, in place in dinosaur age sediment. And it had to be legit, because there was fifteen feet of rock on top. A bulldozer accidentally discovered it as part of the mining operations. The speaker told us how a university evolutionary scientist came out to inspect the find, and realized that this would single handedly destroy evolutionist. The scientist couldn't allow this, so he dug up the skeletons, took them back to the university and locked them away in a cabinet in his lab, so that the truth could be hidden from the world, the truth about God suppressed, and the lie of evolution maintained.

It was maddening. Infuriating. Outrageous. And I was determined for the truth to come out. But I knew I needed solid documentation to back it up, and asked the speaker where I could get more information. He gave me the reference to some obscure Desert Magazine. Before the days of the Internet it was harder to get information, but after several weeks of trying to track the article down and get it through interlibrary loan I finally had my source documentation. Sure enough the article talked about the mystery of human skeletons in dino age rocks, and mentioned the scientist who dug them up, but didn't say anything about the scientist locking the skeletons away and suppressing the truth. Just that they were being analyzed in the lab.

Then I started wondering, "wait a second," if he secretly locked them away in a cabinet then how would anyone know that? And how do we know it wasn't just to store them? After all, the article reported where the bones went so someone could request them to study. If he wanted to get rid of evidence, why keep them? Why not just destroy them?

There was also something strange about the photos. There was discoloration around the skeletons. The article said it was organic decay from the bodies. They weren't even fossils. And they were in a position indicative of human burial. "Wait a second, how could this be a human burial in Flood sediments?" Could this have been a Native American burial? The more I dug, the more things didn't add up.

Subsequent to that came one disappointment after another as I started checking all the other claims I had accepted. Instead of truth suppression, I found YEC lies (probably unintentionally), and rumors, and misinformation, and distortion, and misquoting, and misrepresentation.

Then I learned about how easy it is for rumors to spread and become more fanciful in each retelling. How the true story of "Malachite Man," which turns out to be a Native American burial was nothing unusual, but then a local paper used the opportunity to make a "mystery" out of it when there was none, and then creationists got ahold of the story and retold it and so on.

To this day, never found out where the claim from that the scientist locked the skeletons away to hide the truth. Perhaps it was the guest speaker himself. But it was a good lesson on how easy it is to spread unfounded rumors. Rumors which obviously can't be true, because the scientist ended up giving the skeletons to YEC Carl Baugh, which would be pointless if you're trying to suppress the truth.

Here's the full story of the "MALACHITE MAN"

 

[TB2]

The only thing I would consider as being a transitional form is the fossil dug up showing an animals de-evolution. Something such as Archy or a photo-whale...well, no. Evolutionism doesn't have the ability to enhance a species where the DNA has an increase in information via descent with modification where a fish can eventually evolve into a mammal.

The bible tells us God made the animals so they reproduce after their own kinds...That is using mans taxonomic ranking system an animal won't evolve past species or Genus.....ESPECIALLY on the level the evo tell us it has happened.

We have to separate the two. Look at scientific claims independently, and look at what the Bible claims independently. When we do we come to the conclusion you do that Genesis does not teach evolution. But at the same time we have substantial evidence for evolution including transitional forms (denial doesnt make the evidence disappear).

So what is the solution? Well, it's not twisting Scripture to fit science, nor is it twisting science (into non-science) to fit Scripture.

While I don't have a perfect solution, I do think the right path to a solution begins with the recognition that Genesis 1 is *not* actually written to give us modern scientific information, but is a theological refutation of ancient Egyptian pagan creation myths.

 

[CrowCross]

We have to separate the two. Look at scientific claims independently, and look at what the Bible claims independently. When we do we come to the conclusion you do that Genesis does not teach evolution. But at the same time we have substantial evidence for evolution including transitional forms (denial doesnt make the evidence disappear).

So what is the solution? Well, it's not twisting Scripture to fit science, nor is it twisting science (into non-science) to fit Scripture.

While I don't have a perfect solution, I do think the right path to a solution begins with the recognition that Genesis 1 is *not* actually written to give us modern scientific information, but is a theological refutation of ancient Egyptian pagan creation myths.

Deleted by mod.
Debate the doctrine. Not the person, no personal attacks. Because some don’t agree does not make it demonic.

Thank you

 

[TB2]

Believe it or not....what you are presenting is doctrines of demons

Serious charge, you better watch to make sure you are not guilty of slandering a fellow believer, which definitely *is* ungodly

Your belief has tried to destroy the creation of Jesus Christ as well as the reason for His coming, death and resurrection.

And yet "my belief" is in Christ's creation, death, resurrection and second coming

I've tried to help you and show you the truth...but, you have been deceived. You have denied the Word of God as your post have overwhelming showed...hiding the truth behind false science and other demonic lies.

Riiiiiight. Perhaps you are the one who are deceived into believing you are God's self appointed Judge in place of Christ.

You are guilty of denying the creation of man as per the Bible.

No, I have not denied the creation of man

You have denied the way in which God has bestowed upon people a spirit.

No, and my God doesn't bestow "a spirit," but "the" Spirit, and I have received and am indwelt by His Holy Spirit

You have denied the bible account of the fall of man.

And yet I haven't. I affirm the historical Fall of man

You have denied the biblical account of Noah and the flood

And yet I haven't. I have repeatedly affirmed the biblical account of the Flood, but rejected the man-made YEC theories and assumptions about the flood that you continue to confuse with Scripture.

and I would also imagine you're close to denying the death, burial and resurrection of Christ Jesus.

Well, you are wrong, out of line, and misrepresenting and slandering a fellow believer.

You have shown you are no friend of the Word of God.

You have shown that you confuse man-made YEC flood theories for the Word of God

The only benefit of you here is that true christians can actually see that your false science can be answered and increase their belief in the truth as they understand man didn't evolve from a lesser primate but rather was a direct creation of Jesus Christ.

You are way out of line and need to stop slandering fellow believers

 

[CrowCross]

Serious charge, you better watch to make sure you are not guilty of slandering a fellow believer, which definitely *is* ungodly

You slander Christ Jesus when you say He made us from the monkeys.

And yet "my belief" is in Christ's creation, death, resurrection and second coming

No, you don't believe Christ created the way He said he did.

Riiiiiight. Perhaps you are the one who are deceived into believing you are God's self appointed Judge in place of Christ.

I'm simply testing your false spirit.

No, I have not denied the creation of man

You deny the biblical process of the creation of man...and animals.

No, and my God doesn't bestow "a spirit," but "the" Spirit, and I have received and am indwelt by His Holy Spirit

Then why don't you listen to the Holy Spirit? You throw His inspired Word away and exchange it for an atheistic text book.

And yet I haven't. I affirm the historical Fall of man

You don't affirm the fall as described in Genesis.

And yet I haven't. I have repeatedly affirmed the biblical account of the Flood, but rejected the man-made YEC theories and assumptions about the flood that you continue to confuse with Scripture.

You don't affirm a world wide flood as described in the Bible.

Well, you are wrong, out of line, and misrepresenting and slandering a fellow believer.

Imagine that....you can believe in the resurrection despite science says it's impossible...yet then deny the six day ceation and exchange it for evolutionism?

You have shown that you confuse man-made YEC flood theories for the Word of God

Hows your bathtub theory going?

You are way out of line and need to stop slandering fellow believers

You need to stopmslandering the Bible.....keep in mind you did slander a fellow believer named Wyatt.

 

[TB2]

I have already reported you. You need to cease your slander now. @Carbon please review the exchange

 

[CrowCross]

I have already reported you. You need to cease your slander now. @Carbon please review the exchange

So, I point out how you deny Genesis....and you play the vitim and call it slander?

Simple question...if mankind evolved from lesser primates...how did mankind gets it's sin nature? Perhaps they evolved a sin gene???

 

[TB2]

So, I point out how you deny Genesis....and you play the vitim and call it slander?

Simple question...if mankind evolved from lesser primates...how did mankind gets it's sin nature? Perhaps they evolved a sin gene???

You have not simply said I deny Genesis (a slanderous claim itself) you have questioned my eternal salvation and faith belief.

I am more than willing to dialogue with you. But a respectful exchange is expected. Treat others how you would want to be treated.

@Carbon

 

[CrowCross]

You have not simply said I deny Genesis (a slanderous claim itself) you have questioned my eternal salvation and faith belief.

Yes I have....You deny Genesis...and have exchanged it for evo-ism. You still have no answer as to how mankind got their sin nature using your evo-model.

The question is...why do you believe in the resurrection which is something that is scientifically impossible...yet then disbelieve Genesis because you believe it is scientifically impossible?

I am more than willing to dialogue with you. But a respectful exchange is expected. Treat others how you would want to be treated.

@Carbon

 

[TB2]

Yes I have

Unfortunate. In your zeal for Scripture you have misrepresented Scripture and the gospel message of salvation.

Also according to 1 Tim 4, these are examples of "doctrines of demons":

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4 For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer."

You deny Genesis

Nope

and have exchanged it for evo-ism.

Nope

You still have no answer as to how mankind got their sin nature using your evo-model.

Adam & Eve's disobedience.

The question is...why do you believe in the resurrection which is something that is scientifically impossible...yet then disbelieve Genesis because you believe it is scientifically impossible?

I don't disbelieve Genesis on scientific grounds. To the contrary, I affirm Genesis wholeheartedly.

 

[CrowCross]

CrowCross said:
You still have no answer as to how mankind got their sin nature using your evo-model.

Adam & Eve's disobedience.

....and if A&E had siblings....they would have had children who had children....perhaps even up to today who didn't have a sin nature due to A&E's fall.

 

[TB2]

You still have no answer as to how mankind got their sin nature using your evo-model.

I never claimed that. You assumed. Evolutionary biology does not make theological claims.

and if A&E had siblings....they would have had children who had children....perhaps even up to today who didn't have a sin nature due to A&E's fall

"All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"--Rom 3.23