Dr. Dino

Vance · #81 11th November 2003, 09:21 PM

So, you want a forum where only Young Earth Creationists sit around and discuss, well, Young Earth Creation concepts? Well, I suppose you could have that type of forum if you like.

But this forum is intended to flesh out the very real debate between the concepts of Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism and Theistic Evolution. Since Young Earth Creationism is the minority opinion among Christians worldwide, it seems odd that you would be surprised that many Christians argue against YEC'ism and for one of the other interpretations of Genesis.

To me, the real debate is between OEC and TE, with YEC'ism not even really in the running as a viable and believable option for Christians. But I would never argue that they be excluded from the forum just because I don't agree with them.

Dutchunter · #82 11th November 2003, 11:21 PM

I see no such thing from the the evolutionists such as yourself. I and others believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD. NOT a Creator who starts the evolutionary process- of which there is no evidence at all. When people on your side mock AIG and their credentials etc when their foundation is the BIBLE- and are able to back up what they say- don't go telling me you're here for a discussion on God's CREATION.

I noticed you didn't deny there wasn't any difference between the two forums. Gee...could that be because you have the same beliefs as "non-believers"- following the same "science" that gets disproven all the time? Nah......

Dutchunter · #83 11th November 2003, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by Vance

So, you want a forum where only Young Earth Creationists sit around and discuss, well, Young Earth Creation concepts? Well, I suppose you could have that type of forum if you like.

But this forum is intended to flesh out the very real debate between the concepts of Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism and Theistic Evolution. Since Young Earth Creationism is the minority opinion among Christians worldwide, it seems odd that you would be surprised that many Christians argue against YEC'ism and for one of the other interpretations of Genesis.

To me, the real debate is between OEC and TE, with YEC'ism not even really in the running as a viable and believable option for Christians. But I would never argue that they be excluded from the forum just because I don't agree with them.

Very good!

In other words a forum unlike the two that are already here!

Have some evidence of your "YEC is the minority...."? Do you read AIG's magazines etc? Even I grew up as people still do today with textbooks and the media(of all kinds) pushing evolution down our throats. What I'm seeing is the more people read things such as that put out by AIG the more come to realize what a joke evolution is and how a 6 day Creation and a young earth isn't as crazy as you'd like everybody to believe. They realize how awesome God really is.

troodon · #84 12th November 2003, 01:20 AM

Originally Posted by Dutchunter

could say "I'm a Christian" and post their nonsense here anyway.

The same thing could happen in your suggested forum. Atheists could claim to be YECs and fill up the forum with nothing but lies hoping that you will post them someplace else and be torn apart.

Regardless, the MODs aren't exactly lax on who they let post here. I had several dozen posts removed some time ago before I convinced the MOD in question that I was a Christian.

Is there a Creation only forum where we can discuss God's awesome Creation

There is not a YEC-only forum. If you would like, you can go into the Bugs, Suggestions, and Help (I believe that's the title) forum and ask Erwin to create one. I fail to see the point such a forum would serve.

and not have to argue with those who claim that "science" proves them right

Science does not prove us right; it proves you wrong. There is a tremendous difference which I'm sure you care not about.

when in fact it seems every day they're proven wrong

Big talk

and can only offer- well, things change.

I do not understand what you are trying to say here.

I and others believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD. NOT a Creator who starts the evolutionary process- of which there is no evidence at all

Do you mean there is no evidence of a Creator or no evidence of evolution? If the latter than you are incorrect. See here and here

When people on your side mock AIG and their credentials etc when their foundation is the BIBLE

You think that reading the Bible alone makes one qualified to state what the earth is like? If not then don't their other credentials come into question?

also, when did AiG have the credentials of their members questioned? I must have missed that.

don't go telling me you're here for a discussion on God's CREATION.

If we didn't look at God's creation you, and everyone else here, would still believe the sun was in orbit around the earth.

I noticed you didn't deny there wasn't any difference between the two forums.

There is a very large difference in the people who post. Look at the members that frequent the other forum and notice how many do not post here.

Really, this forum itself is unnecessary but they decided to include it.

I fail to see what kind of difference you are looking for. Everyone who posts here claims God to be their Creator.

Gee...could that be because you have the same beliefs as "non-believers"

Violation of forum rule #1.

The non-believers of this website do not accept the existance of God nor do they accept Jesus Christ as their savior.

following the same "science" that gets disproven all the time?

Once again, big talk. If you think you have a falsification of evolution or an old earth please feel free to create a thread on that very subject. Without it I am forced to believe that you are merely blowing smoke.

Even I grew up as people still do today with textbooks and the media(of all kinds) pushing evolution down our throats

Yeah, and what's with the textbooks and media shoving atomic theory and DNA down our throats too? Atomic bombs didn't destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki, God did!

When you're done with your empty rhetoric please feel free to post examples for discussion.

They realize how awesome God really is.

God is less awesome if humanity was created via evolution? I could not disagree with you more.

notto · #85 12th November 2003, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by Dutchunter

I see no such thing from the the evolutionists such as yourself. I and others believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD. NOT a Creator who starts the evolutionary process- of which there is no evidence at all. When people on your side mock AIG and their credentials etc when their foundation is the BIBLE- and are able to back up what they say- don't go telling me you're here for a discussion on God's CREATION.

I noticed you didn't deny there wasn't any difference between the two forums. Gee...could that be because you have the same beliefs as "non-believers"- following the same "science" that gets disproven all the time? Nah......

I believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD as well. You are putting your interpretation of the bible in front of understanding Gods creation. When we study the creation, we see something different that what is described in the bible which leads us to understand that the creation story in the bible is a metaphor. This understanding does not say that God is not the creator, it is just a different interpretation of how God created with evidence from the actual creation.

I will tell you: I am here to discuss God's creation. To do so, I suggest we look at the creation itself and from it determine what we can about how God created it.

Dutchunter · #86 12th November 2003, 09:27 AM

Then anybody can just claim everything else is just a metaphor in the Bible as well. I am putting them both together, as AIG is able to do so well. Do you read their publications? It's obvious so many don't bother to go thru all they have on their website..even I don't. Magazines etc seem to get the point across much better.

Troodon...next time just respond to what I'm saying instead of picking it apart sentence by sentence. I realize there's so much evidence for your side that you don't have room to post it all

(those links/"evidence" have been refuted. Would you like me to post every link to every case made against evolution by AIG and others?) But I have to respond to your claim of me violating rule #1. As I said in the SAME SENTENCE(shows how desperate you are)

following the same "science" that gets disproven all the time?

THAT is the belief I was referring to. Now go back to finding all those missing links for us

I hate to have to remind people.....evolution is a THEORY- demonstrated over and over to be wrong! A "theory" that actually tests to work- THE bomb- duh..........

Karl - Liberal Backslider · #87 12th November 2003, 09:46 AM

What "missing links" are you referring to? Be specific - give me two groups, one of which is believed to be ancestral to the other, and I'll see what I can do.

Dutchunter · #88 12th November 2003, 09:50 AM

That's the problem....there is no "one ancestral to the other". Show me the ones that show human "evolution". Dinosaurs. Actual evidence- not artists "rendering", not one or a small % of bones used to make up a missing link. Hard evidence.

Karl - Liberal Backslider · #89 12th November 2003, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by Dutchunter

That's the problem....there is no "one ancestral to the other". Show me the ones that show human "evolution". Dinosaurs. Actual evidence- not artists "rendering", not one or a small % of bones used to make up a missing link. Hard evidence.

I said "one believed to be ancestral to the other".

You want the ones showing human "evolution"?

OK.

Here's a series of skulls. Which ones are human? Which ape? - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html

See if you can do better than the creationists who can't agree.

What "dinosaur" evolutionary sequence would you like?

notto · #90 12th November 2003, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by Dutchunter

Then anybody can just claim everything else is just a metaphor in the Bible as well. I am putting them both together, as AIG is able to do so well. Do you read their publications? It's obvious so many don't bother to go thru all they have on their website..even I don't. Magazines etc seem to get the point across much better.

Sure anybody can do that, but in this case, it is only done when there is physical evidence in the creation that directly contradicts and falsifies a literal reading of the texts.

The same thing was done to falsify geocentrism and descriptions of doors in the firmament for allowing rain to fall through and storehouses of snow in the heavens that open when it snows. Do you take these texts as literal descriptions of what causes weather?