Different state past

[CabVet]

God planted a garden one week.

The Bible does not say that, it says that God created a garden.

Trees grew and man and beast ate the fruits. Also Noah sent a bird...no trees. A week later lo and behold trees.

The Bible does not say that. The bird didn't bring back a fully grown tree to the ark. It brought back a leaf.

From science we know that the continents moved. If that happened after the flood the heat would be too great for life on earth. Elementary. Creation week also...waters and land separated...life was not boiled to death.

Science does not say that continents moved in the last 6,000 years.

Indeed a different set of laws is needed here. The only other alternative is to call it all fiction.

There is neither Biblical nor scientific evidence for a "different state past".

 

[Tiberius]

I dismiss nothing, ever. I evaluate stuff on it's merits or lack thereof. Sane people do that sort of thing.

Have you dismissed the idea that you are wrong, or are you willing to accept that you may be mistaken?

 

[dad]

Thank you.


And that was my point.
Don't argue as if you're using the scientific standard if you're not.

Yes I am! I am using it...against you! Unless you can by your own standards support the foundational belief which is the present state is the key to the past, then your whole case is destroyed and worthless.

 

[dad]

Have you dismissed the idea that you are wrong, or are you willing to accept that you may be mistaken?

The idea that I am wrong would need to be shot real high and reach my feet, before I would need to bother stepping on it. If you can get it there, I will entertain the idea that God was right after all, and the false prophets of so called science are dead wrong, but in a way other than I thought. In any case the truth will go marching on, singing. Smiling.

 

[Cromulent]

The idea that I am wrong would need to be shot real high and reach my feet, before I would need to bother stepping on it. If you can get it there, I will entertain the idea that God was right after all, and the false prophets of so called science are dead wrong, but in a way other than I thought. In any case the truth will go marching on, singing. Smiling.

Aw, aren't you just precious!

 

[dad]

The Bible does not say that, it says that God created a garden.

Well, lurkers, here is what it says...you decide.

Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The Bible does not say that. The bird didn't bring back a fully grown tree to the ark. It brought back a leaf.

Right from...what? A tree! This made Noah real real happy. Why? Because now he knew, most likely that all creatures would have plenty to eat. That is what fits best.

Science does not say that continents moved in the last 6,000 years.

No. They are clueless. I say that. They do know that they did move, which is the point. Leave the when to God's word.

There is neither Biblical nor scientific evidence for a "different state past".

The bible past must be different. Science doesn't know any state existed, so it is of no matter what it says.

 

[sandwiches]

No. They are clueless. I say that. They do know that they did move, which is the point. Leave the when to God's word.

Confirmation bias right there, if I've ever seen it.

 

[rambot]

Well, lurkers, here is what it says...you decide.

Gen 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Genesis 1:11-12

Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds.
​

So what now? Two very different descriptors of how plants came into existence. Your theory REQUIRES the second one to be true so I am certain you will try to dismiss the first or use some twisted hopeful logic to explain that that means the "same thing".

Right from...what? A tree! This made Noah real real happy. Why? Because now he knew, most likely that all creatures would have plenty to eat. That is what fits best.

No. They are clueless. I say that. They do know that they did move, which is the point. Leave the when to God's word.


The bible past must be different. [/quote]I would say the Bible past MUST be the same and God created miraculous circumstances that ran counter to it.

 

[dad]

Confirmation bias right there, if I've ever seen it.

No, educated talk, actually. The times when the continents moved are inaccessible to so called science..unknowable..unknown. They have been groping in the dark, following same state past patterns, always coming to a dead end, but blabbing big fables while doing it.

 

[dad]

Genesis 1:11-12

Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds.
​

So what now? Two very different descriptors of how plants came into existence.

False. Chap 2 is merely more detail of what already had happened. How did the land produce vegetation class..? The plants GREW! Simple. How and why did they grow? God planted them.

I would say the Bible past MUST be the same and God created miraculous circumstances that ran counter to it.

No basis for that. It requires countless daily special pleadings and interventions. Occam says...DSP.

 

[Cromulent]

I love it, "Occam's razor says that eveything must have been different in the past in a staggeringly specific and improbable way, which led to everything looking like it developed over millions of years under present-state laws, and also for all the miracles described in the bible to be true"

You clearly understand even less about Occam's razor than you do about geology, or any other field of science for that matter. Congratulations on outdoing yourself once again.

 

[rambot]

False. Chap 2 is merely more detail of what already had happened. How did the land produce vegetation class..? The plants GREW! Simple. How and why did they grow? God planted them.

It's only more detailed when you want it to be.

No basis for that. It requires countless daily special pleadings and interventions. Occam says...DSP.

We have the same amount of basis: Deduction based on biblical text ONLY. Let me be clear, I am not making truth claims. I'm just making truth claims parallel to yours.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's only more detailed when you want it to be.

In your opinion, how many times did God place Adam in the Garden of Eden?

Genesis 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

Genesis 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

(Please answer this.)

 

[rambot]

In your opinion, how many times did God place Adam in the Garden of Eden?

Genesis 2:8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

Genesis 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

(Please answer this.)

I'm going to say that this looks more like a literal text interpretation of an ancient story telling method. I'm neither a hermeneutics expert, nor a linguist. But that's what I think. If I took the time, I'd wager I could find an expert who ascribes to this theory (cause I'm pretty sure I've heard this argument before).

 

[Tiberius]

The idea that I am wrong would need to be shot real high and reach my feet, before I would need to bother stepping on it. If you can get it there, I will entertain the idea that God was right after all, and the false prophets of so called science are dead wrong, but in a way other than I thought. In any case the truth will go marching on, singing. Smiling.

What are you saying? That if I can convince you that you might be wrong, you'll start considering the idea that God was right?

You're making less sense than normal.

 

[dad]

I love it, "Occam's razor says that eveything must have been different in the past in a staggeringly specific and improbable way, which led to everything looking like it developed over millions of years under present-state laws, and also for all the miracles described in the bible to be true"

You clearly understand even less about Occam's razor than you do about geology, or any other field of science for that matter. Congratulations on outdoing yourself once again.

Within the context of a past nature according to the bible, it is simpler to assume difference than special massive daily intervention. Obviously.

As for the conclusions of same state religion that result in old ages under current laws, we do not need Occam for that. We need Merlin! (and an army of sextillions of special purpose pixies)

 

[dad]

It's only more detailed when you want it to be.

No, by any reading possible there are more details in chapter 2. Ask someone that knows about these things.

We have the same amount of basis: Deduction based on biblical text ONLY. Let me be clear, I am not making truth claims. I'm just making truth claims parallel to yours.

That's what you think. You are blathering on about nothing, offering nothing and leading nowhere fast.

 

[dad]

What are you saying? That if I can convince you that you might be wrong, you'll start considering the idea that God was right?

No. God was right anyhow, regardless of what you or I say.
As for you convincing me that a same state godless past existed...good luck with that.

 

[Tiberius]

There's the problem! You've decided that God must be right. You don't start with your conclusion and then try to fit the facts to it, because it just puts you right into the middle of a big mess.

 

[Cromulent]

Within the context of a past nature according to the bible, it is simpler to assume difference than special massive daily intervention. Obviously.

As for the conclusions of same state religion that result in old ages under current laws, we do not need Occam for that. We need Merlin! (and an army of sextillions of special purpose pixies)

Explain why it is the simplest explanation to assume that hundreds of laws of nature we can observe to appear to operate exactly the same as today as millions of years ago, all have changed in such a specific way that there is no method we can use to prove it, instead of just that an arrogant man on the internet has got his biblical interpretation wrong.

Until you do that, I will continue to laugh at the fact that you feel qualified to speak against pretty much every relevatn scientific professional, while failing to understand something as basic as Occam's Razor.