A global flood is simply untenable

[Gary K]

Kind of a "Chariots of the Gods" thing, but with homegrown gods instead of aliens. If you're a fan of flapdoodle, this will not disappoint.

Hey Barbarian,

Long time no see. You knew me as Ffreeloader.

 

[Diamond7]

It is called using common sense.In the history of biblical interpretation, four major types of hermeneutics have emerged: the literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical.

In the history of biblical interpretation, four major types of hermeneutics have emerged: the literal, moral, allegorical, and anagogical.

Noah's flood represents the world wide flood that took place at Pangea 200 million years ago. There have actually been 6 extinctions sense the beginning of the world. The most recent was 13,000 years ago. We see an end to saber took tigers and wholly mammoths. This is why for me a day in Genesis is 1,000 years. OEC is a bit more difficult to explain compared to dispensation.

 

[The Barbarian]

Darwin accomplished nothing with his life. Every word he ever wrote and every thought he ever thought has been well refuted long before he was born. You can't waste a life as well as Darwin and Marx did.

I know you want to believe that, but reality shows us otherwise. Darwin's predictions have been repeatedly verified. Why not just accept God's creation His way?

God says that life was brought forth from the Earth, so we would have to investigate and see where the matter in the Earth came from. We know that all elements heavier than lithium were formed in supernovae.

Sounds like creation minus God here.

Only if you think God is subject to creation. But creation is subject to God. He created the Earth to bring forth life. God uses nature to do most things in this world. Why not just accept it His way?

Genesis 1:3 is not the Big Bang. There is no ancient church fathers who even dropped a hint about this.

They didn't know about DNA, either. Apparently God didn't think it was important to our salvation. You reject Genesis because it doesn't fit your new doctrines.

Ironically, you found only something not in Darwin's theory. He had no way of knowing that common descent of all organisms on Earth was true, nor did he make that claim. Again, not knowing much about this sort of thing is precisely why you keep embarrassing yourself here. Please take a little time to learn about it, and then tell us what you know.

Dr.Louis Pasteur and Joseph Lister came around and proved Darwin's theory completely wrong

Neither of those men said anything about the origin of life, and they certainly didn't object to Darwin's observation that God might have created any number of original ancestors from which all others evolved. Again, if you actually read what these men wrote, you wouldn't be so easy for others to fool you.

proving that the ancient held belief of spontaneous generation (aka, abiogenesis) cannot ever happen no matter how much time you want to give it.

Darwin's theory wasn't about the origin of life. In fact, he attributed the origin of life to God:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Last sentence of On the Origin of Species

You've been so thoroughly indoctrinated into the new faith of YE creationism that you may never escape. But for those still considering the issues, our discussion will be useful for them to think about what has been said here. So it's not been a waste of time.

I was open minded from the start.

I see your denial. But your numerous misunderstandings about the theory and what Darwin actually discovered shows that you never bothered to even learn about it.

I just had enough common sense to know the difference between God and random chance.

That's a prime example. Darwin's great discovery was that it isn't by chance. But it's far from the only misconception you have about his theory or the actual phenomenon of evolution.

Darwin was a teacher of godlessness.

That's another of your misconceptions. Darwin attributed the origin of life to God.

I place my faith in God

If you want to do that, why not just accept His creation as it is?

Even IF the position I hold is wrong I know it won't be held against me.

True. Unless you make an idol of your new faith, God won't care at all. As Huxley said, if he was to face God and told he was wrong, his response would be "I was mistaken." It's honest. And God doesn't really care if you approve of evolution.

I see what evolutionists have done to our western world and all the godlessness that has come from belief in evolution and recognize all this as bad works of the spirit, not bearing good fruit. Jesus said no good tree will bear bad fruit. I believe what Jesus said and will continue to reject what Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Schumer and AOC say.

You seem to be confusing the phenomenon of evolution with your conception of the boogeyman.

 

[The Barbarian]

Hey Barbarian,

Long time no see. You knew me as Ffreeloader.

Oh, my gosh... long time, indeed... what forum was that? Good to hear from you.

 

[Gary K]

I know you want to believe that, but reality shows us otherwise. Darwin's predictions have been repeatedly verified. Why not just accept God's creation His way?

God says that life was brought forth from the Earth, so we would have to investigate and see where the matter in the Earth came from. We know that all elements heavier than lithium were formed in supernovae.

Only if you think God is subject to creation. But creation is subject to God. He created the Earth to bring forth life. God uses nature to do most things in this world. Why not just accept it His way?


They didn't know about DNA, either. Apparently God didn't think it was important to our salvation. You reject Genesis because it doesn't fit your new doctrines.

Ironically, you found only something not in Darwin's theory. He had no way of knowing that common descent of all organisms on Earth was true, nor did he make that claim. Again, not knowing much about this sort of thing is precisely why you keep embarrassing yourself here. Please take a little time to learn about it, and then tell us what you know.


Neither of those men said anything about the origin of life, and they certainly didn't object to Darwin's observation that God might have created any number of original ancestors from which all others evolved. Again, if you actually read what these men wrote, you wouldn't be so easy for others to fool you.


Darwin's theory wasn't about the origin of life. In fact, he attributed the origin of life to God:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Last sentence of On the Origin of Species

You've been so thoroughly indoctrinated into the new faith of YE creationism that you may never escape. But for those still considering the issues, our discussion will be useful for them to think about what has been said here. So it's not been a waste of time.


I see your denial. But your numerous misunderstandings about the theory and what Darwin actually discovered shows that you never bothered to even learn about it.


That's a prime example. Darwin's great discovery was that it isn't by chance. But it's far from the only misconception you have about his theory or the actual phenomenon of evolution.


That's another of your misconceptions. Darwin attributed the origin of life to God.


If you want to do that, why not just accept His creation as it is?

True. Unless you make an idol of your new faith, God won't care at all. As Huxley said, if he was to face God and told he was wrong, his response would be "I was mistaken." It's honest. And God doesn't really care if you approve of evolution.


You seem to be confusing the phenomenon of evolution with your conception of the boogeyman.

Just how many of his missing links have been proven to be frauds? There has never been a real missing link found.

In addition to that there are only right had twists in all dna, in both plant and animal life. Plus with the installation of the James Web telescope you guys are having to rethink your big bang theory and how stars are made. The more we learn the more the creation story becomes the only narrative that makes sense.

Plus life is far more complex that anything else. Yet if I put some iron ore, silica sand, copper, gold, oil, and the natural elements for making batteries in a pile on the ground how many eons would it take for computer to generate itself? Design always demonstrates the fact that there is an intelligent designer behind the design. Besides one of the principle of science is observation. No one has ever observed an amoeba becoming another species.

Yeah, I know I'm just too retarded to understand the genius of evolution.

 

[Gary K]

I

I know you want to believe that, but reality shows us otherwise. Darwin's predictions have been repeatedly verified. Why not just accept God's creation His way?

God says that life was brought forth from the Earth, so we would have to investigate and see where the matter in the Earth came from. We know that all elements heavier than lithium were formed in supernovae.

Only if you think God is subject to creation. But creation is subject to God. He created the Earth to bring forth life. God uses nature to do most things in this world. Why not just accept it His way?


They didn't know about DNA, either. Apparently God didn't think it was important to our salvation. You reject Genesis because it doesn't fit your new doctrines.

Ironically, you found only something not in Darwin's theory. He had no way of knowing that common descent of all organisms on Earth was true, nor did he make that claim. Again, not knowing much about this sort of thing is precisely why you keep embarrassing yourself here. Please take a little time to learn about it, and then tell us what you know.


Neither of those men said anything about the origin of life, and they certainly didn't object to Darwin's observation that God might have created any number of original ancestors from which all others evolved. Again, if you actually read what these men wrote, you wouldn't be so easy for others to fool you.


Darwin's theory wasn't about the origin of life. In fact, he attributed the origin of life to God:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Last sentence of On the Origin of Species

You've been so thoroughly indoctrinated into the new faith of YE creationism that you may never escape. But for those still considering the issues, our discussion will be useful for them to think about what has been said here. So it's not been a waste of time.


I see your denial. But your numerous misunderstandings about the theory and what Darwin actually discovered shows that you never bothered to even learn about it.


That's a prime example. Darwin's great discovery was that it isn't by chance. But it's far from the only misconception you have about his theory or the actual phenomenon of evolution.


That's another of your misconceptions. Darwin attributed the origin of life to God.


If you want to do that, why not just accept His creation as it is?

True. Unless you make an idol of your new faith, God won't care at all. As Huxley said, if he was to face God and told he was wrong, his response would be "I was mistaken." It's honest. And God doesn't really care if you approve of evolution.


You seem to be confusing the phenomenon of evolution with your conception of the boogeyman.

I have some more info for you.

Seven-day human biological rhythms: An expedition in search of their origin, synchronization, functional advantage, adaptive value and clinical relevance - PubMed

This fact-finding expedition explores the perspectives and knowledge of the origin and functional relevance of the 7 d domain of the biological time structure, with special reference to human beings. These biological rhythms are displayed at various levels of organization in diverse species -...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Here is a quote from a scientific article,

Mammalian pineal gland: 7-Day Rhythmic Activity In their
researchon rats at London University in 1975, Vollrath, et al. [1]
confirmed the fact that the mammalian Pineal Gland undergoes
prominent circadian changes in function, which are quite dependent
on environmental lighting conditions. They reported that there are
indications which suggest that the Pineal Gland of rats kept in their
laboratories exhibited in addition to 24 hour cycles, characteristic
7-day cycles. It was unclear to them whether the rhythms were
caused by internal or external factors and whether the rhythm was
just a peculiarity of rats kept under environmental conditions of
their laboratory. The finding that concerns us for the purposes of this
discussion however, is that HIOMT enzyme activity under natural
lighting conditions was HIGHEST on Saturdays and lowest on
Thursdays; the Thursday values being six times lower than those on
Saturdays. A gradual decrease in enzyme activity was noted between
Saturdays and Thursdays. A striking increase occurred between
Fridays and Saturdays.


https://www.sciresliterature.org/Biology/SJB-ID28.pdf

 

[The Barbarian]

I have some more info for you.

(possible biological origin for the seven-day week)
Cool. Humans may have been affected by this apparent seven-day rhythm found in other living things. That wouldn't be the only biological rhythm in humans that was evolved in earlier vertebrates, but it's a pretty interesting one, if true.

I'd be even more impressed if other could replicate the results. Anyone else found that? Incidentally, it's been shown that organisms kept deep in caves tend to lose circadian rhythms. Might be interesting to see if this is innately evolved or is merely environmental influence.

It might be argued that God put the desire to keep a 7-day week to His glory in humans, but it's difficult to see how He would intend that for rats, among others.

And since, for most of our time on Earth, humans were hunter-gatherers, who had a who lot more leisure time than just one day every seven days, I'm kinda skeptical that it represents some kind of metabolic need.

 

[The Barbarian]

Just how many of his missing links have been proven to be frauds?

You misread. It's "missing lynx." And they found it:

Lynx issiodorensis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When I started out in biology we lacked transitional forms for:
Fish to tetrapods
Reptiles to mammals
Dinosaurs to birds
Base anapsids to turtles
Salamanders to frogs
Wasps to ants
Land mammals to whales
(Long list)

We have all of them, now. Which of those do you think are frauds, and what is your evidence?

In addition to that there are only right had twists in all dna, in both plant and animal life.

Which makes sense, since all eukaroytes are descended from prokaryotes that had the same sort of DNA. In fact, chemical bonding makes this particular DNA spiral in only one way. But you've wandered off the subject. This is more about the way life began than about evolution. Darwin just thought that God created the first living things. If He had done it by poofing, everything we see would still work the same way.

Plus with the installation of the James Web telescope you guys are having to rethink your big bang theory

You've kinda wandered off the subject. If God had just poofed the universe into being magically, evolution would work exactly the way we see it working now.

Plus life is far more complex that anything else. Yet if I put some iron ore, silica sand, copper, gold, oil, and the natural elements for making batteries in a pile on the ground how many eons would it take for computer to generate itself?

This is why Paley used an artifact instead of natural objects to attempt the argument you're trying to make. If you used a natural thing, no one would see the issue. But you've wandered away from evolution to abiogenesis again. There is considerable scientific evidence that God was right when He said that the Earth brought forth living things. But let's stick to evolution for now.

Besides one of the principle of science is observation. No one has ever observed an amoeba becoming another species.

Speciation is an observed fact. Even most creationists now concede new species and genera, and sometimes familes. Would you like to learn about that?

Yeah, I know I'm just too retarded to understand the genius of evolution.

“how extremely stupid not to have thought of that” ​

Thomas Huxley, on reading Darwin's theory

Huxley was too hard on himself. So are you. It's so simple, and so efficient that people never noticed until Darwin took a close look.

Interestingly, engineers are now using evolutionary processes to solve problems that are too difficult for design. They are called "genetic algorithms", and they are quite effective for many engineering problems.

Once again, God knows best.

 

[Gary K]

(possible biological origin for the seven-day week)
Cool. Humans may have been affected by this apparent seven-day rhythm found in other living things. That wouldn't be the only biological rhythm in humans that was evolved in earlier vertebrates, but it's a pretty interesting one, if true.

I'd be even more impressed if other could replicate the results. Anyone else found that? Incidentally, it's been shown that organisms kept deep in caves tend to lose circadian rhythms. Might be interesting to see if this is innately evolved or is merely environmental influence.

It might be argued that God put the desire to keep a 7-day week to His glory in humans, but it's difficult to see how He would intend that for rats, among others.

And since, for most of our time on Earth, humans were hunter-gatherers, who had a who lot more leisure time than just one day every seven days, I'm kinda skeptical that it represents some kind of metabolic need.

That original abstract came from PubMed. The second article confirms what was in the abstract. There are two sources. The second article cites 11 different scientific studies including the foremost researcher, Hallberg, in the world into circaseptian cycles. That tells me this has a very solid scientific basis.

As to rats, you're smart enough to fully understand God who is able to speak the world and all life in it into existence? And these cycles are all triggered by light and darkness. Even melatonin levels fluctuate on a 7 day cycle.

 

[The Barbarian]

That original abstract came from PubMed. The second article confirms what was in the abstract. There are two sources. The second article cites 11 different scientific studies including the foremost researcher, Hallberg, in the world into circaseptian cycles. That tells me this has a very solid scientific basis.

Biological clocks govern numerous aspects of human health, including weekly clocks-called circaseptan rhythms-that typically include early-week spikes for many illnesses.

Apparently, there are circadecadal rbythms, which may be related to geomagnetic activity.

MAPPING OF CIRCASEPTAN AND CIRCADIAN CHANGES IN MOOD

Circadian changes in mood have been described earlier. A positive affect (PA) has been separated from a negative affect (NA), as independent components in opposite admittedly subjective directions, a circadian rhythm characterizing both aspects. Herein, ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07420528.2016.1202264

For whatever reason this evolved in vertebrates, it seems that God's command was in accordance with our inherited nature.
Mark 2:27 And he said to them: The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

As to rats, you're smart enough to fully understand God who is able to speak the world and all life in it into existence? And these cycles are all triggered by light and darkness. Even melatonin levels fluctuate on a 7 day cycle.

Kind of a remarkable confirmation of common descent. Given that the length of the day has increased reasonably steadily over billions of years, it would be interesting to see if there's any evidence for a change in the length of the rhythm over time.

 

[Gary K]

Biological clocks govern numerous aspects of human health, including weekly clocks-called circaseptan rhythms-that typically include early-week spikes for many illnesses.

Apparently, there are circadecadal rbythms, which may be related to geomagnetic activity.

MAPPING OF CIRCASEPTAN AND CIRCADIAN CHANGES IN MOOD

Circadian changes in mood have been described earlier. A positive affect (PA) has been separated from a negative affect (NA), as independent components in opposite admittedly subjective directions, a circadian rhythm characterizing both aspects. Herein, ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07420528.2016.1202264

For whatever reason this evolved in vertebrates, it seems that God's command was in accordance with our inherited nature.
Mark 2:27 And he said to them: The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.

Kind of a remarkable confirmation of common descent. Given that the length of the day has increased reasonably steadily over billions of years, it would be interesting to see if there's any evidence for a change in the length of the rhythm over time.

I find it interesting that you are so stuck on evolution that you'll change to a theistic evolutionist rather very quickly rather than just admit the evidence points directly toward God speaking the world into existence and creating our entire environment in six days and the Sabbath on the seventh. There can be no other reason for the weekly cycle and our internal circeptian rhythm.

I couldn't do that. I find truth to be too precious a commodity in this day and age of deceit and corruption.

 

[The Barbarian]

I find it interesting that you are so stuck on evolution

Biologist here. So I've seen it happening. Can't be better evidence than that. You're so probably stuck in denial that you just tune out that kind of evidence.

that you'll change to a theistic evolutionist rather very quickly

I'm just a Trinitarian Christian who happens to know what the evidence is. God did a pretty good job, in my estimation. YE creationists aren't quite as convinced. Pity.

the evidence points directly toward God speaking the world into existence and creating our entire environment in six days and the Sabbath on the seventh.

Since we find the same rhythms in other vertebrates, and God seems unconcerned if they do stuff on the Sabbath, your assumption runs counter to the evidence as well as to Christian orthodoxy.

There can be no other reason for the weekly cycle and our internal circeptian rhythm.

From the evidence, the seven-day rhythm came about long before man was here. Why not just accept it God's way?

I find truth to be too precious a commodity in this day and age of deceit and corruption.

Truth isn't solidified opinion.

 

[Gary K]

Biologist here. So I've seen it happening. Can't be better evidence than that. You're so probably stuck in denial that you just tune out that kind of evidence.


I'm just a Trinitarian Christian who happens to know what the evidence is. God did a pretty good job, in my estimation. YE creationists aren't quite as convinced. Pity.


Since we find the same rhythms in other vertebrates, and God seems unconcerned if they do stuff on the Sabbath, your assumption runs counter to the evidence as well as to Christian orthodoxy.


From the evidence, the seven-day rhythm came about long before man was here. Why not just accept it God's way?


Truth isn't solidified opinion.

You're wrong once again.

Exodus 20: 8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

God also mentions other livestock in the commandments.

Exodus 20: 17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

In the Bible the word cattle is often used as a generic word for livestock. Just like corn is often used generically for grains.

 

[GenemZ]

Too many species, too many mouths to feed. And if you're YEC you have over 1,000 species of dinosaurs and therapod dinosaurs to contend with. And frankly we are definitely on their menu. The Ark would need warehouse sized food and water storages. And what about waste disposal? The stinkiest ark to have ever sailed the global sea. Have you ever driven past a cattle farm but imagine that on a larger scale in an enclosed space? I think Christianity especially the Fundies, may need to accept that the flood was a massive regional one and likely a passed down oral tradition that may grew alittle larger each time it was taught and that was eventually became canonized by Moses and the ancient scribes. But furthermore, it fits the pattern of Yahweh's judgment of the nations throughout the Old Testament. In fact, both Jesus and Peter drew comparisons between the Flood and the destruction of Jerusalem A.D. 70 itself a regional, national judgment.

View attachment 339512
View attachment 339513

Noah's flood was only intended to destroy corrupted mankind.

Man was yet in his infancy and not that many humans were walking the earth at that time.
Also, all men had to be within an earshot of Noah to hear God's warnings of coming judgment.

At that time in history the term "whole earth' spoke in reference to the abode of mankind.
For, in Genesis 11:1-2? The term, "whole earth" spoke in reference to where all of mankind was living on the plain of Shinar.

​

​

Now the whole earth had one language and a common speech. ​

As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there." Genesis 11:1-2​

God was not out to destroy all the animals of the entire surface of the earth. Only corrupted mankind was his target.
Only animals that were indigenous to the realm where man was was living were to be destroyed along with man.

Noah's flood could have taken place (and be contained by God) within a land mass equivalent of the small state of Rhode Island.
Possibly even smaller. For to have God to judge all men and be fair? All mankind would have had to have access to hearing the warnings of Noah. And, to know about the ark which was being built for 120 years.

Mankind as it was then known to be, was the term, "one earth."
One earth like what the "one earth" was when all mankind was when located only on a single plain of Shinar! Genesis 11:1-2

​

​

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them ​

in chains of darkness to be held for judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world when ​

he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, ​

and seven others." 2 Peter 2:4-5​

​

Commonly held erroneous teachings, when repeated often over time, will be assumed to be the truth...
But, as you can now see. One must become a student of God's Word to avoid such errors.

grace and peace ........... GeneZ

​

 

[The Barbarian]

Biologist here. So I've seen it happening. Can't be better evidence than that. You're so probably stuck in denial that you just tune out that kind of evidence.


I'm just a Trinitarian Christian who happens to know what the evidence is. God did a pretty good job, in my estimation. YE creationists aren't quite as convinced. Pity.


Since we find the same rhythms in other vertebrates, and God seems unconcerned if they do stuff on the Sabbath, your assumption runs counter to the evidence as well as to Christian orthodoxy.


From the evidence, the seven-day rhythm came about long before man was here. Why not just accept it God's way?


Truth isn't solidified opinion.

You're wrong once again.

You must be joking. There were living things long before the 10 Commandments were give to us. God didn't make circaseptan rhythms by writing a commandment. Nature produced these a long, long time before that according to His will. He merely pointed out the need for a day or rest.

Mark 2:27 And He said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

For once, why not just accept it God's way?

 

[The Barbarian]

Noah's flood was only intended to destroy corrupted mankind.

Seems obvious. Why would God go after innocent animals to get even with man?

Now the whole earth had one language and a common speech. As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there." Genesis 11:1-2

I wonder if it said "the whole (eretz)" or "the whole (tevel)." My guess is that the Hebrew was "eretz."

Noah's flood could have taken place (and be contained by God) within a land mass equivalent of the small state of Rhode Island.
Possibly even smaller. For to have God to judge all men and be fair? All mankind would have had to have access to hearing the warnings of Noah. And, to know about the ark which was being built for 120 years.

Yes, this is so. We don't know for sure, because we don't have the details. But it makes sense.

 

[Gary K]

Biologist here. So I've seen it happening. Can't be better evidence than that. You're so probably stuck in denial that you just tune out that kind of evidence.


I'm just a Trinitarian Christian who happens to know what the evidence is. God did a pretty good job, in my estimation. YE creationists aren't quite as convinced. Pity.


Since we find the same rhythms in other vertebrates, and God seems unconcerned if they do stuff on the Sabbath, your assumption runs counter to the evidence as well as to Christian orthodoxy.


From the evidence, the seven-day rhythm came about long before man was here. Why not just accept it God's way?


Truth isn't solidified opinion.


You must be joking. There were living things long before the 10 Commandments were give to us. God didn't make circaseptan rhythms by writing a commandment. Nature produced these a long, long time before that according to His will. He merely pointed out the need for a day or rest.

Mark 2:27 And He said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

For once, why not just accept it God's way?

So long, Barbarian. I know from sad experience that it's no use discussing this any more with you. We argued endlessly on TOL, but God has changed me a lot since then. Have a good life.

 

[The Barbarian]

So long, Barbarian. I know from sad experience that it's no use discussing this any more with you.

Sometimes, it comes down to facts. No matter how clever the argument, there's no getting around the facts.

We argued endlessly on TOL

Is it still around? It started to fall apart when Knight left.

but God has changed me a lot since then. Have a good life.

You too. Enjoy His blessings.

 

[Gary K]

Sometimes, it comes down to facts. No matter how clever the argument, there's no getting around the facts.


Is it still around? It started to fall apart when Knight left.

You too. Enjoy His blessings.

Yes. It's down to about a half dozen posters as JudgeRightly is now an administrator and he temp bans anyone who disagrees with him. Sherman is the other administrator and she reverses his bans on a regular basis. He's a very slow learner as it's happened 4 times with me and I;ve only been back less than a year.. The guy just hates anyone who doesn't believe the same way he does. He banned a user who recently returned under another name simply because he doesn't believe the same thing JR does. You know what for? For creating a post JR thought was too long. No warning, no nothing. And JR creates pages long posts.. JR, RightDivider and Clete. are all busy calling anyone who disagrees with their beliefs a fool and a liar.

I have to admit though that lately, the last week or so. RD has not been doing it like he was.

 

[The Barbarian]

Yes. It's down to about a half dozen posters as JudgeRightly is now an administrator and he temp bans anyone who disagrees with him. Sherman is the other administrator and she reverses his bans on a regular basis. He's a very slow learner as it's happened 4 times with me and I;ve only been back less than a year.. The guy just hates anyone who doesn't believe the same way he does. He banned a user who recently returned under another name simply because he doesn't believe the same thing JR does. You know what for? For creating a post JR thought was too long. No warning, no nothing. And JR creates pages long posts.. JR, RightDivider and Clete. are all busy calling anyone who disagrees with their beliefs a fool and a liar.

Clete and I clashed a lot, but he always seemed like a decent person. Sherman always seemed like a sensible person to me. It's sad to see a formerly thriving site fall into ruin like that.