God created this universe ex nihilo --- and that type of creation did not leave an audit trail that we can trace back.
Originally Posted by lucaspa
Sure it did. Right back to the Big Bang.
Creatio ex nihilo left an audit trail back to the Big Bang? I don't think so. The Big Bang is creatio ex materia, not creatio ex nihilo.
Originally Posted by lucaspa
But even Young Earth Creationists think there is an audit trail at least from the Flood.
Again --- can we get off this Flood stuff? It has nothing to do with the Creation Week.
Originally Posted by lucaspa
That's where you missed Guardian's point: the physical universe is the "Documentation".
AVVET, Christianity has always held that God has twobooks. Why do you keep insisting in ignoring the second book? It's very ironic, considering that second book is Creation. In saying we must only look to scripture, you deny that God created!
We've covered this before, haven't we? The King James Bible disagrees with the McGraw-Hill Bible --- and we know what that means, don't we?
Originally Posted by lucaspa
The creation stories give us the Who and why, but there are no eyewitnesses.
There aren't?
What do you call these guys?
Originally Posted by Job 38:6-7
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Interesting verb tense here. Do you believe the creation is still in progress?
Originally Posted by lucaspa
The fact that you capitalize "Documentation" is evidence that you have are into bibliolatry -- worship of the Bible instead of God.
I capitalize "Documentation" because I capitalize "Bible". It's just a preference of mine, and I don't think I need to defend some outlandish accusation that I'm worshipping It.
How can something as vast as the creation of the entire universe not leave one hint of evidence of its "true" creation?
Because it came from nothing.
If you think there should be evidence, then I invite you to take this challenge --- 1 --- and tell me, in your own words, what that evidence should consist of.
Flood Geology is a massive ad hoc hypothesis to save Creation Week from Falsification.
And again --- I am not going to discuss the Flood in the context of the Creation Week.
Originally Posted by lucaspa
It supposedly eroded enough rock so that the large amount of sedimentary rock was possible.
This earth was inhabited by superhumans prior to the Flood, and neither you, nor I, know what kind of mining and irrigation they used to deface this planet.
Attributing what you see in your fossil and geological records to untouched natural phenomena is a serious breech of Dispensation Theology.
But again --- I am not going to discuss the Flood in this thread ---
And again --- I am not going to discuss the Flood in the context of the Creation Week.
We know, AV -- and lucaspa just explained the reason.
This earth was inhabited by superhumans prior to the Flood, and neither you, nor I, know what kind of mining and irrigation they used to deface this planet.
Would that be the same Flood you just said you weren't going to discuss?
Attributing what you see in your fossil and geological records to untouched natural phenomena is a serious breech of Dispensation Theology.
Calling what you do "Dispensation" is a serious breach of credibility.
Besides, who needs Dispensation when the New Testament practically screams Supersessionism?
But again --- I am not going to discuss the Flood in this thread ---
I suppose that means you refuse to "discuss" those "superhumans" you blithely dropped into the conversation. Surely you don't expect that bit of ad hoc-ery to stand unchallenged?
__________________
Don't talk like one of them. You're not! Even if you'd like to be.
To them, you're just a freak, like me! They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke. Dropped at the first sign of trouble. They're only as good as the world allows them to be. I'll show you. When the chips are down, these... these civilized people, they'll eat each other.
See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Last edited by Nathan Poe; 23rd February 2009 at 05:09 PM.
If you believe God is the God who created the universe, any totally objective analysis of His creation will only point to Him and the method and timeframe He used to create it.
Therefore, as a key component to Christianity is faith in Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit, it is antithetical to the core of that belief to consistently and indiscriminately ignore and disbelieve in what objective analysis of God's work tells us about it. In essence it is a little like looking at a hotdog and insisting it's a bicycle.
Am I now saying that Christians cannot be creationists? No. Christians can be a lot of things. I am saying that it is silly to place one's own subjective semantics above objective and factual analysis of God's handiwork. If we truly believe in God as our father and creator we should be thrilled at the prospect of learning more about Him, no matter what we learn. We cannot do so if we lock ourselves into a single, locked mindset. God does not fit in such a mindset. He is far too big, awe-inspiring and well, just plain awesome (pardon the use of subjective words. But I really think He is!). So I think it is sad to see so many "creationists" denying whatever doesn't fit their notion of what the truth is. To me, it seems like a lack of faith - or a misconception.
There is one more point why creationism shouldn't matter a whit;
It doesn't save us. It doesn't tell us to love one another. It doesn't spread peace. It does NOT lead people to Christ (but rather pushes them away). It's alternative[s] is[are] not sinful or harmful. And it does not fit what studies of God's handiwork has revealed.
You gave me something to mull over. Very interesting.
__________________
Jeremiah 29:11 “For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope.”
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
You gave me something to mull over. Very interesting.
Thank you. I really do think an aversion to science (which is frequent in many religious circles) is antithetical to true faith for the above reasons. And that would necessarily include biology.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Originally Posted by Martin Luther King Jr.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. dir="ltr">
Advocates of capitalism are very apt to appeal to the sacred principles of liberty, which are embodied in one maxim:
The fortunate must not be restrained in the exercise of tyranny over the unfortunate.
"no man can serve two masters; ye cannot serve both God and mammon." - Bible (Matthew 6:24)
Linear Mode
