|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
If we assumed nature was the same you might have a point. Too bad you need a reason to do so. Got any?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18350 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
What makes your stubborn insistence on your belief any more of a sure thing than ringos "hunches"? He has evidence on his side whereas you are simply betting on belief and an inerrant Bible. Granted your argument presupposes that things were different in earlier times where he sees no reason to assume this.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
creation writes:
You still have it backwards. If you claim that the sun will rise in the west tomorrow, YOU are the one who needs a reason. If you claim that there was a "change in nature", YOU are the one who needs a reason. Nobody is going to take YOU seriously unless YOU can provide a reason for YOUR silly claims. If we assumed nature was the same you might have a point. Too bad you need a reason to do so.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi ringo
ringo writes:
Who said the Americas existed at that time above water? It's an inaccurate map. It doesn't show the Americas at all. You know that is an inaccurate map because ----------------Fill in the blank.
ringo writes: I'm talking about what the text says. It is clear from the text that The "division of the earth" in Peleg's time was the dispersion of languages from Babel. You are manufacturing your own definitions of Hebrew words. The Hebrew word in Genesis 10:25 says the land not people were divided. What you are doing is taking what someone has said the Hebrew words means instead of looking them up for yourself.
ringo writes: There's no point in trying to discuss Hebrew with you when you're so confused about English. I have always been confused about English but I have never been confused about Biblical Hebrew.
ringo writes: We already know that YOU don't know what you're talking about. Then you should have no problem with taking the two Hebrew words being discussed in Message 1203 and show me how they mean the same thing when they are spelled different, and one of them is only used 4 times in the Bible. If you can't do that then you are the one who does not know what they are typing about. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi Son of Man,
Welcome to the fray.
Son of Man writes:
Genesis 1:2 to Genesis 2:3 is not the opening of a story that establishes the setting, and gives background details. Genesis 1 to 2.2 is a future prologue to the whole Bible The opening of the story is Genesis 1:1 in which God created the heavens and the earth. The history of the day God created the heavens and the earth is given in Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:24. Which is all the information given about the origin of the universe. Science it totally silent on the origin of the universe. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi ringo,
ringo writes: You still have it backwards. If you claim that the sun will rise in the west tomorrow, YOU are the one who needs a reason. If you claim that there was a "change in nature", YOU are the one who needs a reason. The sun don't rise or set anywhere so why make such an outlandish statement? God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.5 |
If we assumed nature was the same you might have a point. Too bad you need a reason to do so. Got any? So far you haven't given us not to do so.What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
Science claims nature was the same, it needs a reason.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
creation Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 654 Joined: |
As much as you may chose to believe his hunches, he has NO evidence of any same nature in the past.
When it comes to beliefs about creation, I suppose I expect so called believers of the bible to side with creation. Otherwise I know they are impostors.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son of Man Junior Member (Idle past 1963 days) Posts: 26 From: Ireland Joined: |
ICANT wrote
Genesis 1:2 to Genesis 2:3 is not the opening of a story that establishes the setting, and gives background details. The opening of the story is Genesis 1:1 in which God created the heavens and the earth. The history of the day God created the heavens and the earth is given in Genesis 2:4 through Genesis 4:24. Which is all the information given about the origin of the universe. Science it totally silent on the origin of the universe. I did say Genesis 1 to 2.2my meaning was if this isn't a future prologue why does it mention the creation of man and woman? and if there is only one God why state in our image? I don't understand were your going with your last statement 2.4 to 4.24 origin of the universe? the first will be the last and the last will be the first.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Arkangel Daniel Member (Idle past 1984 days) Posts: 20 Joined: |
Creation of the universe took 13 Billion years to make it look like it does today. So creation is scientific and the process involves God's influence. The bible has a lot of inaccuracies and creation is one part that is in need to be fixed also there was never a talking snake or a tree with fruit that would make a person smarter. God is in fact the very first scientist and it is very scientific to be able to create a planet, star, galaxy or universe or life. Of all that I just mentioned which would seem the easiest? So how does one convey how to everyone in a scientific manner so both the Scientific community and the Creationists are able to interpret how this stuff occurred and why? So I'll do my best here lets start with how a star works.
A star consists of a fuel dimension bigger than this universe full of fuel. (Does it seem odd this idea? the evidence is in a black hole) In the centre of the fuel dimension is a worm hole that resembles a black hole and this draws fuel into its centre and compresses it, at the other end in the core of the star is the worm hole exit point where the fuel exudes through holes in the stars shell and then reacts to a catalyst on the surface of the star and then combusts in the upper atmosphere. Inside the shell of the star is gravity element which produces gravity fields for all planets, moons and comets etc in the system. Atmosphere of the star and planets is also accomplished with a gravity field. There is also wormhole element and that controls the fuel flow for the star. In each galaxy there is a pivot star which has a gravity field that encompasses the entire galaxy and this holds everything together through out galactic movement. When a star becomes a black hole everything inside its gravity fields is pulled into the black hole and into the fuel dimension which is empty except for fuel pockets. In the case of a pivot star everything inside the galaxy would get pulled into the black hole. Black holes are sphere shaped as are worm holes. When a star becomes a black hole it decouples from the pivot star and is left behind. I am the Arkangel Daniel and I am from Heaven.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
I'll let you post in your own topic but I cant let you post randomly in topics like this---I will have to suspend you if you keep it up. I respect your writing, but we need to have order around here.
I suspended you one hour to get your attention. Please go to the link up top and click on messaging. You can talk with me there. Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
ICANT writes:
Anybody with any sense. Whole continents do not rise up out of the ocean in a few centuries. And we know THAT because we have dated items in the Americas that are older than the map.
Who said the Americas existed at that time above water? ICANT writes:
Because, as I said, the Americas are not on it.
You know that is an inaccurate map because ----------------Fill in the blank. ICANT writes:
No I'm not. I'm using the meanings that Hebrew scholars use.
You are manufacturing your own definitions of Hebrew words. ICANT writes:
You ARE confused about Biblical Hebrew. You're just too confused to know that you're confused.
I have always been confused about English but I have never been confused about Biblical Hebrew. ICANT writes:
And you should have no problem looking up what Hebrew scholars think. But you already know what Hebrew scholars think, don't you? You already know that your interpretation is an outlier, don't you? Then you should have no problem with taking the two Hebrew words being discussed in Message 1203 and show me how they mean the same thing when they are spelled different, and one of them is only used 4 times in the Bible. Of course, we also have the confirmation of science: The continents did NOT divide at any time during human history.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
ICANT writes:
Don't be stupid. The sun don't rise or set anywhere so why make such an outlandish statement?And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
creation writes:
You're being dishonest. You don't use that criterion in your own life. You don't expect tomorrow to be 48 hours instead of 24. You don't expect your bank to move without informing you. You don't expect Honey Nut Cheerios to suddenly be made of 100% beef. Science claims nature was the same, it needs a reason. You expect things to stay the same unless there is some reason to think they have changed.And our geese will blot out the sun.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024