Why do men have nipples?

[Split Rock]

Do we have the Word of God at all? anywhere? in your opinion?

At best we have man's fallible and inaccurate attempt at understanding God and man's place in the universe.

 

[Metal Minister]

I never said that the bible is a fiction. I said it was not the Word of God. Please do not put words in my mouth.

To say it was simply written by man implies it is a fiction,and not from God.

 

[46AND2]

Either that, or He made it old.

That's what I mean by making it look old. Hypothetically, 2 hours after he made an old earth, it's still only two hours old.



We believe in a Common Designer, not a common ancestor; and what does the Flood have to do with the creation event?

I didn't say it had anything to do with the creation event. We were talking about a literal Genesis. The flood happens in Genesis.



Not even close ... you can't daisy-chain man back to cyanobacteria, can you?

If evolution was a digital message, that message would be so intelligible as to be impossible to decipher ... what with the missing links and all; on the other hand, creation is a solid analog message.

How do you explain the evidence I just gave you? ERVs, pseudogenes, PATTERNS of INSERTED mutations that form convergent nested hierarchies that cannot be explained by chance? Why do you have the same ERVs in the same location as your parents did, unless you got them through heredity? Why does that same pattern occur between other species?

Instead of arguing what science can't explain, respond to what it does explain.

 

[AV1611VET]

At best we have man's fallible and inaccurate attempt at understanding God and man's place in the universe.

That's not even close to what I asked.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's what I mean by making it look old. Hypothetically, 2 hours after he made an old earth, it's still only two hours old.

Existentially or physically?

How do you explain the evidence I just gave you?

I don't ... that stuff is over my head.

Instead of arguing what science can't explain, respond to what it does explain.

Science wasn't used in the creation event, so there is nothing to respond to.

 

[46AND2]

I don't ... that stuff is over my head.

Then why even try to argue that science doesn't have the overwhelming evidence that I claimed it does?

It doesn't seem to matter to you, even if it did, so why deny it? I mean, you claim that God did things outside of science, so does it really make a difference to you if science is right about natural observations?

 

[AV1611VET]

Then why even try to argue that science doesn't have the overwhelming evidence that I claimed it does?

I gave my reason why I believe what I believe.

Let me restate it:

You can't daisy-chain man back to cyanobacteria.

Your 'overwhelming evidence' might be overwhelming to you, but it means nothing to me.

(And feel free to keep ignoring my specific questions to you; most everyone else does.)

 

[46AND2]

You can't daisy-chain man back to cyanobacteria.

How would you know if they could or not? It would all be over your head, anyway.

Besides, you know that it is an unreasonable request, because you know that we don't have a record of every species which ever lived.

But that doesn't mean we can't figure things out indirectly. We haven't observed Pluto making a full revolution around the sun, but we know how long it takes.

Just because you don't comprehend the overwhelming evidence doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It's still there whether you learn it or not.

 

[46AND2]

(And feel free to keep ignoring my specific questions to you; most everyone else does.)

I do a pretty dang good job of responding to nearly everything addressed to me. I will occasionally miss something, and I will occasionally let something lie (give you the last word).

If I do miss something in the future that you would like to see addressed, by all means let me know, and I'll do my best.

 

[46AND2]

You can't daisy-chain man back to cyanobacteria.

You can't daisy-chain your Biblical manuscripts to the originals, either, but you don't seem to have a problem accepting those.

 

[AV1611VET]

How would you know if they could or not? It would all be over your head, anyway.

I would assume that if the fossil record was completed ... no missing links ... we wouldn't hear the end of it until the Rapture.

Knowing how scientists like to ook & eek at finding teeth or limbs or whatever else from the graves they rob, I would assume the resultant flow of patting each other on the back in front of TV cameras would bore us into the next dispensation.

Besides, you know that it is an unreasonable request, because you know that we don't have a record of every species which ever lived.

Then don't expect me to jettison creationism for evolutionism.

But that doesn't mean we can't figure things out indirectly. We haven't observed Pluto making a full revolution around the sun, but we know how long it takes.

Evolution is a game of connect-the-dots, it is not an analog story like creationism; and I'm not willing to play connect-the-dots with evolution.

I will with [so called] God-of-the-Gaps ... but not with evolution.

Just because you don't comprehend the overwhelming evidence doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It's still there whether you learn it or not.

Suit yourself.

You consider it 'overwhelming' ... I'm not obligate to.

 

[HitchSlap]

To say it was simply written by man implies it is a fiction,and not from God.

To say it was written any other way is unsupportable.

 

[AV1611VET]

I do a pretty dang good job of responding to nearly everything addressed to me. I will occasionally miss something, and I will occasionally let something lie (give you the last word).

I hunted back and couldn't find it, but I specifically asked you if something was existential or physical, which didn't get answered.

If I do miss something in the future that you would like to see addressed, by all means let me know, and I'll do my best.

Fair enough ... but be advised ... I ask hard questions.

Have you seen my Apple Challenge?

 

[Metal Minister]

To say it was written any other way is unsupportable.

Except every word is God breathed, it says so itself, and many of its writings are found to be completely accurate by extra-biblical sources. You may choose to ignore it, but to minimize God's Word is offensive to me and many others. Simply a heads up so that we can avoid hurt feelings and arguments later on.

 

[Metal Minister]

I hunted back and couldn't find it, but I specifically asked you if something was existential or physical, which didn't get answered.

The age of the earth after 2 hours old

 

[AV1611VET]

You can't daisy-chain your Biblical manuscripts to the originals, either,

Really?

You mean like I have done so many times before?

AV350 Gothic Version
AV700 Anglo-Saxon Version
AV1389 Wycliffe Version
AV1534 Tyndale Version
AV1560 Geneva Bible
AV1568 Bishop's Bible
AV1611 King James Version

 

[AV1611VET]

To say it was written any other way is unsupportable.

Wasn't the Challenger considered 'supportable'?

 

[AV1611VET]

The age of the earth after 2 hours old

That's it!

Thank you, bro!

I just got out of the hospital, and I'm not up to speed yet!

 

[46AND2]

I hunted back and couldn't find it, but I specifically asked you if something was existential or physical, which didn't get answered.



Fair enough ... but be advised ... I ask hard questions.

Have you seen my Apple Challenge?

The existential or physical question was one that I let lie, because ultimately, that whole argument is semantics. Either way you want to describe it, the world looks old to science, but the Bible says it's young (indirectly through genealogies, of course.

So, in order to believe the literal account of Genesis, we have to ignore physical observations, and I see that as being deceptive on a literal Genesis God's part.

I have not seen the apple challenge.

 

[46AND2]

Really?

You mean like I have done so many times before?

AV350 Gothic Version
AV700 Anglo-Saxon Version
AV1389 Wycliffe Version
AV1534 Tyndale Version
AV1560 Geneva Bible
AV1568 Bishop's Bible
AV1611 King James Version

We have no original manuscripts of any book of the Bible as far as I am aware. If this is incorrect, I'd be happy to look at evidence to the contrary.

Edit: I will look up the Gothic Version