Is there ANY solid creation evidence?

[AV1611VET]

You can check ANY interlinear bible. It won't get away from the fact that humans and animals are all called 'nephesh' in the original Hebrew, and that word 'nephesh' is translated into the word 'soul' in many places.

Mike, let me let you in on a little secret here.

In the beginning, God had 40+ put His eternal words down on "paper".

These were called the 'autographs' -- written in the handwriting of the men who wrote them.

Over time, these writings dried up and blew away due to age -- but before they did, they were meticulously recopied into a 2nd-generation and 3rd and 4th sets of writings called 'originals'.

Now -- in the meantime -- Satan is also busy plagiarizing God's words, and his set of secretaries also copy the autographs down into their own set of books.

Over time, those who were well-versed in the True Writings wouldn't touch the plagiarized writings, and so they were never really put into circulation.

These writings are what scholars today are finding and calling 'the originals'.

They are available to be found, because they were never used by true believers.

 

[Phred]

Mike, let me let you in on a little secret here.

Oooooo can't wait. A secret but you know it.

In the beginning, God had 40+ put His eternal words down on "paper".

The "god" you can't prove exists and the one that half the world disagrees with you about? That magic being?

These were called the 'autographs' -- written in the handwriting of the men who wrote them.

Oh boy. Mostly illiterate sheepherders suddenly become literate. It couldn't be because only priests and such were literate and THEY wrote what would keep them in their places of power, would it? Nooooooo.

Over time, these writings dried up and blew away due to age -- but before they did, they were meticulously recopied into a 2nd-generation and 3rd and 4th sets of writings called 'originals'.

Geee... if your buddies tell us that we can't ever know anything about evolution because it happened so long ago then how is it that your magic words can dry up and blow away yet still be valid?

Now -- in the meantime -- Satan is also busy plagiarizing God's words, and his set of secretaries also copy the autographs down into their own set of books.

Oh goodie! Another magic being for whom there is no evidence. What fun!

Over time, those who were well-versed in the True Writings wouldn't touch the plagiarized writings, and so they were never really put into circulation.

You hope. Because if the magic being writing got confused with the other magic being writing why you could be worshiping the wrong writing!

These writings are what scholars today are finding and calling 'the originals'.

Which aren't good for anything because they aren't the original originals... according to all your good buddies.

They are available to be found, because they were never used by true believers.

Or because they aren't actually real. You never know. Do you? Oh, but what do you care... I mean, who needs evidence?

 

[Greg1234]

Or because they aren't actually real. You never know. Do you? Oh, but what do you care... I mean, who needs evidence?

Actually the onus is on you to provide evidence that chance and necessity create man.

 

[USincognito]

5 pages in and we still don't have any evidence for Creationism other than links to Kent "prisoner 894431" Hovind and AiG's schlock?

 

[AV1611VET]

5 pages in and we still don't have any evidence for Creationism...

You were expecting some -- when you guys can't even think up something that would constitute evidence?

1

 

[juvenissun]

5 pages in and we still don't have any evidence for Creationism other than links to Kent "prisoner 894431" Hovind and AiG's schlock?

If I give one, are you sure you can understand it? If you don't, then you might say that it is not an evidence.

Or better, when you say that it is not an evidence, does it mean that you don't understand it?

Don't know what am I saying? Try this:

A "solid" evidence of creationism is that the earth has a large ocean.

If you do not understand how did the earth get its ocean, then how could you say that it is not an evidence of creation?

This tells you one thing: the acceptance (or the rejection) of creationism should not be based on evidence. Because there are too many evidences. And you (and I) are too limited to evaluate all these evidences.

Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

 

[USincognito]

A "solid" evidence of creationism is that the earth has a large ocean.

If you do not understand how did the earth get its ocean, then how could you say that it is not an evidence of creation?

This tells you one thing: the acceptance (or the rejection) of creationism should not be based on evidence. Because there are too many evidences. And you (and I) are too limited to evaluate all these evidences.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

If I give one, are you sure you can understand it? If you don't, then you might say that it is not an evidence.

Or better, when you say that it is not an evidence, does it mean that you don't understand it?

Don't know what am I saying? Try this:

A "solid" evidence of creationism is that the earth has a large ocean.

If you do not understand how did the earth get its ocean, then how could you say that it is not an evidence of creation?

This tells you one thing: the acceptance (or the rejection) of creationism should not be based on evidence. Because there are too many evidences. And you (and I) are too limited to evaluate all these evidences.

^Essentially your argument

 

[Split Rock]

Mike, let me let you in on a little secret here.

In the beginning, God had 40+ put His eternal words down on "paper".

These were called the 'autographs' -- written in the handwriting of the men who wrote them.

Over time, these writings dried up and blew away due to age -- but before they did, they were meticulously recopied into a 2nd-generation and 3rd and 4th sets of writings called 'originals'.

Now -- in the meantime -- Satan is also busy plagiarizing God's words, and his set of secretaries also copy the autographs down into their own set of books.

Over time, those who were well-versed in the True Writings wouldn't touch the plagiarized writings, and so they were never really put into circulation.

These writings are what scholars today are finding and calling 'the originals'.

They are available to be found, because they were never used by true believers.

Really, AVET. This is all made up. You certainly have an active imagination, but that doesn't make any of this real.

Face some facts:
1. Indeed there are no extant originals.
2. All the books were written/ copied/ translated by MEN, whether accepted as cannon or not. Not God. Not Satan.
3. The Hebrew writings that all the bibles today are based on were written in what is now a dead language, with none of the vowels written down and few of the idioms understood with any certainty.
4. The KJV1611 version is out of date and was translated by people who have a poorer understanding of said Hebrew than we do today.
5. There was probably never any single authoritative version of the bible. Ever.
6. It is highly unlikley there was ever any error free translation of any book of the bible into any non-Hebrew language.

I believe it is too hard for you to accept these facts, and treat the bible as it should be treated. Instead, you insist it is what it is clearly not. A 100% authoritative, complete, error and contradiction free single book written by your god for you to read.

 

[AV1611VET]

Really, AVET. This is all made up. You certainly have an active imagination, but that doesn't make any of this real.

Wow -- twice in less than a week I've been falsely accused of making something up.

QV please: Autographs vs Originals

 

[wensdee]

Wow -- twice in less than a week I've been falsely accused of making something up.

QV please: Autographs vs Originals

I guess you really are one of the chosen few AV1611VET, not only were you born in the right place and born to the right people you were given the 'one and only true bible' to read and believe.

The question was 'Is there any solid creation evidence?' which was passed over completely for something else for obvious reasons.

Perhaps the question should be asked again? Is there any solid creation evidence? we already ALL know the answer to that [don't we] but it shows the fragile foundations of creationism when the question needs to be ignored completely by creationists.

 

[AV1611VET]

I guess you really are one of the chosen few AV1611VET, not only were you born in the right place and born to the right people you were given the 'one and only true bible' to read and believe.

The question was 'Is there any solid creation evidence?' which was passed over completely for something else for obvious reasons.

Perhaps the question should be asked again? Is there any solid creation evidence? we already ALL know the answer to that [don't we] but it shows the fragile foundations of creationism when the question needs to be ignored completely by creationists.

I thought I answered that already: 66

 

[Nathan Poe]

I thought I answered that already: 66

Vanity doesn't count as an answer.

 

[theFijian]

You were expecting some -- when you guys can't even think up something that would constitute evidence?

1

88

 

[Split Rock]

Wow -- twice in less than a week I've been falsely accused of making something up.

QV please: Autographs vs Originals

I don't see anything in your link about "diabolical plagiarism," nor did you respond to any of the points I made in my post. As far as the link is concerned, it is hardly convincing. The originals are all gone, therefore God doesn't care about the originals, therefore they don't matter. As if the reason they no longer is exist is because God doesn't think they carry any weight, rather than for practical reasons.

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't see anything in your link about "diabolical plagiarism," nor did you respond to any of the points I made in my post. As far as the link is concerned, it is hardly convincing. The originals are all gone, therefore God doesn't care about the originals, therefore they don't matter. As if the reason they no longer is exist is because God doesn't think they carry any weight, rather than for practical reasons.

Well then -- here is what God has to say on that point:

Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psalm 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

That doesn't sound to me like He thinks they don't carry any weight.

 

[Phred]

Actually the onus is on you to provide evidence that chance and necessity create man.

In a thread that asks, "is there ANY solid creation evidence?" you want me to once again provide evidence that "chance" and "necessity" create man.

Man... like all other creatures on the earth evolved to become what he is. Randomness played a part, yes. I have no idea what you mean by "necessity" so I can't offer you any evidence there at all.

What do you consider "evidence"?

 

[Naraoia]

I'm a KJVO -- appealing to the Hebrew or Greek or Latin or Swahili or any other language to make your point is, to me, a ploy.

Poor Christians who didn't/don't read English, limited to the treacherous words of Satan...

Seeing as I, on principle, think Satan wrote the Biblos Interlinear Bible -- no, there I aren't are.

And in fact, I never heard of the Biblos Interlinear Bible until just now.

It's so convenient when you can dismiss any new argument "on principle"!

My point is that you CAN NOT write one as good as that in Gen 1. So, do not laugh at your ancestors, no matter how primitive you think they were.

"Good" is subjective. IMO, Professor Tolkien's creation myth is much better than Genesis. *shrug*

 

[Split Rock]

That doesn't sound to me like He thinks they don't carry any weight.

From your link:

"NO ONE can overlook the fact that God didn't have the least bit of interest in preserving the "original" once it had been copied and its message delivered."

Whatever is your point if it isn't that the originals don't matter because God doesn't care about them anymore?

 

[Skaloop]

"Good" is subjective. IMO, Professor Tolkien's creation myth is much better than Genesis. *shrug*

Personally, I am partial to Douglas Adams' story about the creation and purpose of Earth.

As my wife likes to say, she's a 42ian.