Creationist vs Evolutionists

Clai gave the best creationist theory I have heard, which is saying a lot since I have been inundated with these theories. The reason it is so good is that it makes the question moot.

You are a wine connieseur during Jesus’ life, and you just so happen to witness the miracle of him turning the water into wine. You having a great knowledge of wine and able to determine the specific age, quality and region of any wine would be able to determine the qualities of the Jesus’ wine. In fact, the wine would have to have these qualities if it was to be considered wine. It would not be outside of the powers of a miracle for the wine to have these qualities. Within the instant of the miracle, the water in its transformation to wine gains all the qualities that wine needs to be wine: age, grape, region.

For the world to be a world, it needs to have all the qualities inherent with a world. These qualities would include a history. The reason it needs this history is based on the physical laws which preside over the world. As God creates the world, he creates the history the world needs to be a world.

If this is true, then the question becomes how does this really affect anything? If God created the universe (world) with everything intact because to be the universe it needed all the qualities of the universe, then how would when it happen actually affect us? 100,000,000,000 years ago, 5000 years ago. Its still the same outcome. The laws of physics are still the same. The fossil are still the same. The story of evolution is still the same. It has to have all these qualities to be a universe.

There you go end of argument. It does not lessen the pursuit of the history because if God did create everything then you are still learning something.
Knowing more about the universe would be equal to learning more about God.

Its a brilliant argument because it dismisses the argument.


This entry was posted in main. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Creationist vs Evolutionists