Do you accept evolution as a valid scientific theory?

[gluadys]

Ummm...duhhh...that was the point of my post...let's nit pick some more ....

it's both tiresome an annoying

However, if you can observe the truth of Creation in nature, and you agree that the Bible is G-d's truth...then why bother denying creation...after all...it's part of the Bible

Nobody is denying creation. It is the young-earth creationism model of creation which is being called into question.

 

[david_x]

Yeah, i've been gone awhile so i'll try to catch up.
Rebuttle first.

So if prophecies are a basis for believing in Christ they are also a basis for believing in Buddhism, Hinduism, various Native American and African beliefs and run-of-the-mill psychics.

What makes the prophecies of Christ unique? Why should they be given any more credence than the prophecies concerning Cyrus or Krishna or Caesar Augustus?

These "prophices" were either never came true, were made very close to the event or are unfounded.
The Bible is simply more true than the rest in that the prophices were made a long long time before they happened, have come true (except those that will come true in the end time) andare very well recorded and preserved.

According to the story, God agreed that the tower could reach the sky (Gen. 11:6). That is why he acted to prevent its completion.

he said that men would feel invincable, so he created a
"national pride.

Do you know what a firmament is?

Insolent!!!

Show me some facts that are not true. Show me facts that are biased in that they are true for some and not for others.

"Do you know that it is less than 500 years since humans discovered the sky is not a solid roof above our heads?"

some believed this some belived other things, they are "prescintific" theoris just as scientific theories are presomthing.

So come on, how many meet the testable criteria I gave, and how many were fulfilled? "a lot" isn't a credible answer.

Your "criteria" is not even founded to be testable.

And so would anyone else wishing to appear to be the messiah, or anyone writing a story latter that wished the character to appear to be the messiah. Assuming this was a pre-identified messianic prophesy.

Very well point them out.

Have you looked at the webpage by WinAce kindly provided above - when you can pick out any verses you like from the bible and claim them as messianic prophesies you can prove anyone is the messiah.

it didn't work. well it worked the first time then i got out for somthin' and tried again and it didn't work.

 

[david_x]

Nobody is denying creation. It is the young-earth creationism model of creation which is being called into question.

What you mean is that God is not a liar but an exaderator?

 

[The Lady Kate]

What you mean is that God is not a liar but an exaderator?

No... that we misunderstood what God was trying to tell us... but now that we've taken a closer look at the rest of His work, we're beginning to get it right.

 

[Dannager]

What you mean is that God is not a liar but an exaderator?

That's weird, I could've sworn I replied to this post already. Maybe I didn't actually hit the button.

Assuming you mean "exaggerator" (the Spellcheck button is right there, if you need it), you can't really call him an exaggerator because it likely wasn't God's intention to let us know how long the act of creation took. It was an allegorical message designed to teach some important truths about the nature of God, and was thus laced with metaphor and poetic imagery. The notion of a six-day creation allowed the Bible to separate each distinct part of what the people of the time believed the world to be made up of, and then state that God is the source of each of those things. It really is an extremely effective set of metaphors.

 

[gluadys]

These "prophices" were either never came true, were made very close to the event or are unfounded.

You can document this?

he said that men would feel invincable, so he created a
"national pride.

What would make them feel invincible? Would it not be the successful completion of the tower up to heaven?

And where does the story say anything about national pride?

Insolent!!!

Don't make unfounded accusations. A lot of people don't know what "firmament" meant to the ancient Hebrews or even the KJV translators. The solidity of the firmament (it is neither atmosphere nor outer space) is part of the original meaning.

If you rely on a modern translation, or even the KJV translation, without knowledge of ancient cosmologies, it is natural to think that "firmament" means "sky" in the sense that we understand "sky".

But that is not the way it would be understood 400+ years ago.

"Do you know that it is less than 500 years since humans discovered the sky is not a solid roof above our heads?"

some believed this some belived other things, they are "prescintific" theoris just as scientific theories are presomthing.

Show me. Show me a pre-scientific text, published before 1500 which suggests an alternate theory to a solid firmament.