One thing I don't understand about the creationist position

[AV1611VET]

Supernatural stuff is like the whole point of the Bible.

And theres zero evidence for any of it.

So intellectual honesty dictates the Resurrection didn't happen; is that correct?

Unless you count evidence against.

Like with " flood".

There is no evidence against the Flood.

Except on academia's litmus paper.

 

[Ophiolite]

So intellectual honesty dictates the Resurrection didn't happen; is that correct?



There is no evidence against the Flood.

Except on academia's litmus paper.

1. Intellectual honesty requires recognition that belief in the Resurrection must be based largely on faith.
2. There is abundant evidence against the flood in that there is nothing in the geological column to support it. The sequential presence of diverse non-flood sediments throughout the column preclude the possibility of a global flood.

 

[Astrid]

1. Intellectual honesty requires recognition that belief in the Resurrection must be based largely on faith.
2. There is abundant evidence against the flood in that there is nothing in the geological column to support it. The sequential presence of diverse non-flood sediments throughout the column preclude the possibility of a

" Honesty can take a hike".

last thursdayism involves elimination of flood evidence.
And replacing it with fake evidence.
So honest, so very sane and credible.


Honesty is a matter of consistency.
Those who think differently should try
their approach.

Those who want to play the absence of evidence / evidence of absence game should try it in explaining how they really - really do have collateral for a loan.

Even tho theyve no evidence.

 

[AV1611VET]

1. Intellectual honesty requires recognition that belief in the Resurrection must be based largely on faith.

Does that apply to the Flood as well?

Does intellectual honesty require recognition that belief in the Flood must be based largely on faith?

If so, can a person be both well-informed and a believer in the Flood at the same time?

2. There is abundant evidence against the flood in that there is nothing in the geological column to support it.

So you're saying absence of evidence is evidence of absence?

(Read that question slowly.)

The sequential presence of diverse non-flood sediments throughout the column preclude the possibility of a global flood.

So my swimming pool is full of Coca-Cola, and that proves my swimming pool was never full of water?

 

[AV1611VET]

"Honesty can take a hike".

That's why Diogenes is still roaming around, isn't it?

last thursdayism involves elimination of flood evidence.

No.

Last Thursdayism says any evidence of the Flood is fake.

And replacing it with fake evidence.

No.

You have Last Thursday doing a two-step:

1. Remove evidence of the Flood.
2. Replace it with evidence of the Flood.

That doesn't make sense.

So honest, so very sane and credible.

And just like Thalidomide -- so wrong.

Honesty is a matter of consistency.

It's a matter of recognition as well.

Those who think differently should try their approach.

Yup.

Get a bumper sticker that says: GIVE HONESTY A CHANCE.

Those who want to play the absence of evidence / evidence of absence game should try it in explaining how they really - really do have collateral for a loan.

Our "down payment" is the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is the down payment of our inheritance, until the redemption of the possession, to the praise of his glory. Until the redemption of the possession. This means we already possess our inheritance. We are just waiting to redeem it.

SOURCE: NoLimits Church

Even tho they've no evidence.

Imagine that.

 

[dlamberth]

2. There is abundant evidence against the flood in that there is nothing in the geological column to support it. The sequential presence of diverse non-flood sediments throughout the column preclude the possibility of a global flood.

Also, I'd like to add that there is no ground level evidence of a global flood.

 

[Astrid]

Also, I'd like to add that there is no ground level evidence of a global flood.

As it know and acknowledged by all
but the ignorant or the dishonest.

Our Catholic Filipina maid heard about flood,
and just assumes it's so, as no less than bible and
priest said it's so. She'd never thought about it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Also, I'd like to add that there is no ground level evidence of a global flood.

You suppose it was cleaned up?

 

[dlamberth]

You suppose it was cleaned up?

Not a chance.

 

[Ophiolite]

Also, I'd like to add that there is no ground level evidence of a global flood.

I think we are probably saying the same thing. Most (all?) flood arguments I have seen attribute the bulk of the Phanerozoic (Cambrian forwards) deposits to the flood. So, in that sense, ground level goes way down the geological column. That's how they (claim to) explain the distribution of different fossils within the column.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not a chance.

I suppose you think God left that opening in Adam's side wide open as well?

 

[Ace777]

I suppose you think God left that opening in Adam's side wide open as well?

Did we forget to read: "closed up the area with flesh." As a TE I am sure you do not want to know how I understand that verse. Although if you believe that everything happened in an instant then why would it matter how God made Eve from Adam?

 

[Ace777]

Also, I'd like to add that there is no ground level evidence of a global flood.

Everywhere you look is evidence for a global flood. The question is when, not if. Maybe God uses a different watch than we do.

 

[dlamberth]

Everywhere you look is evidence for a global flood.

Could you please point out that evidence?

 

[dlamberth]

I suppose you think God left that opening in Adam's side wide open as well?

What I think is that there was no Biblical Adam.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Everywhere you look is evidence for a global flood. The question is when, not if. Maybe God uses a different watch than we do.

Over millions of years many places have once been submerged but that is not the same thing as a global flood.

 

[Ace777]

However old it is, it has only been in existence since 4004 BC.

Is that when your watch stopped ticking? Do you understand what it means when they say time is relative?

Einstein determined that time is relative. In other words, the rate at which time passes depends on your frame of reference

Some people say the Bible is written from God's frame of reference, not yours or mine.

In mathematics and philosophy, the concept of infinitesimal relates to quantities that are incredibly small, approaching zero. While eternity typically suggests boundless duration, we can indeed consider an “infinitely small” aspect of eternity.

[ \lim_{{\Delta t \to 0}} \Delta t = 0 ]

This represents the idea that as the time interval becomes infinitely small, it approaches zero. So, in a sense, even within eternity, there can exist infinitely small moments.

Dem bones are connected.

 

[Ace777]

What I think is that there was no Biblical Adam.

Science, time magazine and the Bible all disagree with you.

"The Book of Genesis puts Adam and Eve together in the Garden of Eden, but geneticists’ version of the duo — the ancestors to whom the Y chromosomes and mitochondrial DNA of today’s humans can be traced — were thought to have lived tens of thousands of years apart. Now, two major studies of modern humans’ Y chromosomes suggest that ‘Y-chromosome Adam’ and ‘mitochondrial Eve’ may have lived around the same time after all1,2."

Genetic Adam and Eve did not live too far apart in time - Nature

Studies re-date 'Y-chromosome Adam' and 'mitochondrial Eve'.

www.nature.com

 

[Astrid]

Could you please point out that evidence?

Grand canyon! Clams on Everest!
Flash frozen mammoths in Siberia!

 

[Ace777]

Could you please point out that evidence?

Would you like to look at Florida, the Pacific Islands or the Rockey mountains for evidence of a global flood? We are told that the mountains were covered, are we not? What the Bible does not talk about is that much of the water was frozen.