There is no Creation Debate

[dad]

Why do you use a computer and the internet if you think the scientific method denies truth?

What have these to do with origins? Focus.

 

[Loudmouth]

What have these to do with origins? Focus.

Everything. Focus.

 

[dad]

Everything. Focus.

So your computer has everything to do with telling us the origins of the universe and man? Cute.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see, so you agree now that the creator of all things is Jesus?

Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

No. Why would I believe those silly stories? You do realize that as a Christian you have a duty to explain this. So far you have failed totally to live up to your responsibility to fulfill this verse:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Peter 3:15

 

[Loudmouth]

So your computer has everything to do with telling us the origins of the universe and man? Cute.

Answer the question. FOCUS.

How does light get from the star to the fishbowl?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Predictable. Just mock any scientists who dare to go against the ruling paradigm of naturalism. If you deny that takes place then take a look here.

Of course it is predictable. That site openly tells their workers that they cannot use the scientific method. Why would you ever use them in a scientific argument?

And please, show some actual discrimination against scientists. That is simply a list of false claims from a creationist site. Guess what? Creation "scientists" are almost all failed scientists in the subject of creationism. Most of them were fairly ineffectual scientists out side of that topic too.

 

[dad]

No. Why would I believe those silly stories? You do realize that as a Christian you have a duty to explain this. So far you have failed totally to live up to your responsibility to fulfill this verse:

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Peter 3:15

Well, will you admit that according to the bible (no matter what you chose to believe) Jesus created all things?

Baby steps...

 

[joshua 1 9]

False it is a tool to avoid truth and deny truth and mock truth.

Science itself is neutral. It is not good or evil. It can be used for good or evil. Like a knife can do great harm, yet in the hands of a skilled surgeon a knife can bring about health and healing. A cook can use a knife to prepare food for the table. A carpenter like Jesus can use a knife or a cutting edge to build with. Science can be used for good and science can be used for evil. We try to encourage people to do good and make the right choices, still it is their choice and they will be accountable for the choice that they make.

 

[dad]

Answer the question. FOCUS.

How does light get from the star to the fishbowl?

How does an angel get from heaven to earth? Gabriel appeared in no time at all on earth to Daniel from the very throne of God in heaven. How did he get through our time and space?

You seem to obsess over fishbowl time and space as if nothing else could exist. Then you seek to impose fishbowl time on the universe and all of creation! Trick exposed.

 

[dad]

Science itself is neutral. It is not good or evil. It can be used for good or evil. Like a knife can do great harm, yet in the hands of a skilled surgeon a knife can bring about health and healing. A cook can use a knife to prepare food for the table. A carpenter like Jesus can use a knife or a cutting edge to build with. Science can be used for good and science can be used for evil. We try to encourage people to do good and make the right choices, still it is their choice and they will be accountable for the choice that they make.

I disagree. Godless philosophy is not neutral. Neither is it possible to get just the good from even real knowledge in this fallen sinful world.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I disagree. Godless philosophy is not neutral. Neither is it possible to get just the good from even real knowledge in this fallen sinful world.

I never took philosophy so I do not know anything about it. Perhaps I should look into it a little.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, will you admit that according to the bible (no matter what you chose to believe) Jesus created all things?

Baby steps...

Sorry, but for a rational person there is no choice in believing. So perhaps you might want to ask that question again.

 

[Loudmouth]

How does an angel get from heaven to earth? Gabriel appeared in no time at all on earth to Daniel from the very throne of God in heaven. How did he get through our time and space?

You seem to obsess over fishbowl time and space as if nothing else could exist. Then you seek to impose fishbowl time on the universe and all of creation! Trick exposed.

Answer the question. FOCUS!!!!

How does light get from the star to the fishbowl?

 

[joshua 1 9]

How does an angel get from heaven to earth? Gabriel appeared in no time at all on earth to Daniel from the very throne of God in heaven. How did he get through our time and space?

Most likely through what we call a wormhole. You can travel from one end of the universe to the other very fast. Much faster then the speed of light.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

Guess what? Creation "scientists" are almost all failed scientists in the subject of creationism. Most of them were fairly ineffectual scientists out side of that topic too.

Took me a minute but found this video. This guy compares Lawrence Krauss and creationist Russ Humphreys by how many papers they have had published and how many times they've been cited in other papers. To be fair, he also includes Stephanie Chasteen, who has a phd in physics but works in consulting and education services for high schools and colleges. His comparison demonstrates what an utter failure Humphreys is as a scientist.

 

[dad]

Most likely through what we call a wormhole. You can travel from one end of the universe to the other very fast. Much faster then the speed of light.

Speculation. Stars were meant to be seen on earth. Angels were not. The question basically becomes how could light exist or move unless there were time and space as we know it? We only see it move and exist here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Took me a minute but found this video. This guy compares Lawrence Krauss and creationist Russ Humphreys by how many papers they have had published and how many times they've been cited in other papers. To be fair, he also includes Stephanie Chasteen, who has a phd in physics but works in consulting and education services for high schools and colleges. His comparison demonstrates what an utter failure Humphreys is as a scientist.

The same YouTuber made a very good video about transitional fossils, a slight language warning for those uber-sensitive types out there:

 

[Loudmouth]

Speculation. Stars were meant to be seen on earth. Angels were not. The question basically becomes how could light exist or move unless there were time and space as we know it? We only see it move and exist here.

How did it get here?

 

[HitchSlap]

There is no creation debate.

I completely agree with you, dad (for once.).

 

[SteveB28]

How did it get here?

Give him some time..........he needs to invent something.