Your Thoughts on Creation & Evolution

Speedwell · Sep 9, 2019

inquiring mind said:
Whether science can discover God is certainly not my point. My point is that in-light-of there are no scientific answers (stay in that revolving door all you want) as to ‘the reason, the why, or the how’ we came about, why shouldn’t Creation be a considered possibility by non-believers. They are willing to hypothesize everything else.

Creation is always a possibility, no matter what the "how" turns out to be. Theists accept it, atheists do not, but the decision is not related to what the "how" is or whether it is ever fully known.

inquiring mind · Sep 9, 2019

pitabread said:
If faith is being used as a stopgap for lack of knowledge per your original question then no. While I can't speak for everyone, I don't see the appeal of 'faith' in that context.

I was not making that appeal; it’s just that you always disgard faith as uncertainty, or unscientific, and then you made the statement that you were comfortable with uncertainty???

Aman777 · Sep 9, 2019

inquiring mind said:
To believe in Creation is to believe in God, and a maker of ‘all we know, see, and don’t see’ out of nothing (because how could anything exist on its own for no reason). I’m not sure I understand why there would even be substitute reasoning. What possible alternative impetus or process could bring about something out of nothing (nothing meaning nothing to even cause a big bang)? Forget about the evolution aspect for a moment – how could ‘we don’t know, we can’t imagine, or we don’t have a clue’ not point you toward God as the Creator being the only possibility? I’m just trying to understand what possible rationale would prevent that reasoning?

It's because God lives in a world of Energy/Light. In the beginning, God changed some of that energy into matter in the physical world. More than 3k years later, Albert Einstein discovered that energy and matter are two sides of the same coin. God told us the same in Scripture.

inquiring mind · Sep 9, 2019

Speedwell said:
Creation is always a possibility, no matter what the "how" turns out to be.

That explains your position.

Speedwell said:
Theists accept it,

Yep

Speedwell said:
atheists do not

That's about the simplist form of my original question... "I’m just trying to understand what possible rationale would prevent that reasoning?"

Speedwell · Sep 9, 2019

inquiring mind said:
That explains your position.

meant that it is always a logical possibility. It's not just my position.

Yep

That's about the simplist form of my original question... "I’m just trying to understand what possible rationale would prevent that reasoning?"

What reasoning? The "reasoning" which I just set forth? All scientifically literate persons agree with it--both theists and atheists alike. Whether one believes in God or not the science is the same.

Aman777 · Sep 9, 2019

Speedwell said:
No, that is only true for those who subscribe to the Doctrine of Perspicuity, a distinctly Protestant doctrine and a recent invention at that.

But what I meant is, is that what you are preaching here seems unique to you alone. For instance, I never heard any other Christian assert that their were pieces of the Firmament at the bottom of Lake Van.

The ancient view is that the entire present Earth was totally covered in Water BUT that is untrue scientifically because it would have destroyed planet Earth and there was nowhere for the water to go except into Space and we could still see it.

Scripture states that on the 150th day after the flood began, the Ark was above the mountains of Adam's world. Genesis 7:20-24 Scripture ALSO states that the Ark was resting upon the mountains of Ararat on the SAME 150th day after the flood began. Genesis 8:4

How could BOTH these accounts be True? The only way is for Adam's entire universe to have been destroyed by sinking it into a large body of water AND at the same time, this would release the 450 ft long Ark into Lake Van, the largest Lake in the mountains of Ararat. Adam's world was destroyed and Noah's Human family was brought to the present world. That's God's Truth.

Speedwell · Sep 9, 2019

Aman777 said:
The ancient view is that the entire present Earth was totally covered in Water BUT that is untrue scientifically because it would have destroyed planet Earth and there was nowhere for the water to go except into Space and we could still see it.

Scripture states that on the 150th day after the flood began, the Ark was above the mountains of Adam's world. Genesis 7:20-24 Scripture ALSO states that the Ark was resting upon the mountains of Ararat on the SAME 150th day after the flood began. Genesis 8:4

How could BOTH these accounts be True? The only way is for Adam's entire universe to have been destroyed by sinking it into a large body of water AND at the same time, this would release the 450 ft long Ark into Lake Van, the largest Lake in the mountains of Ararat. Adam's world was destroyed and Noah's Human family was brought to the present world. That's God's Truth.

How come you are the only one who believes it?

inquiring mind · Sep 9, 2019

Speedwell said:
What reasoning? The "reasoning" which I just set forth?

"That Creation is always a possibilty" post #2521

Speedwell said:
All scientifically literate persons agree with it--both theists and atheists alike.

Good luck with that!

Aman777 · Sep 9, 2019

Speedwell said:
How come you are the only one who believes it?

ONLY Christians who live in the last days before Jesus returns, have the "increased knowledge" of science, history, genetics and math which allows us to finally understand Genesis. Daniel 12:4

To support this, in the last days before Jesus returns, God is going to "pour out" His Spirit, which is the Spirit of Truth, John 14:17 upon ALL flesh. Today's people who do not believe God, will believe Science, when the discoveries of the last days are complete. Joel 2:28 and Act 2:17 I've already documented many of these scientific Facts in Genesis and no one can refute a single one of them.

So read the Bible with the knowledge of today's science, history, genetics and math, and you will see that ONLY God could have written the Bible. Amen?

Speedwell · Sep 9, 2019

inquiring mind said:
"That Creation is always a possibilty" post #2521

Good luck with that!

Go ahead and ask. Anyone who has ever taken the required undergraduate philosophy of science course knows it, atheists and theists alike. The existence of God is an unfalsifiable proposition--it is always a logical possibility.

Bungle_Bear · Sep 9, 2019

Aman777 said:
I'm not dancing. Cattle were made by Jesus from the dust of the ground. Gen 2:19 They were "created" eternally by God the Trinity.

Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after His kind, and cattle......... after Their (Trinity) kind,..... and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after His kind: and God saw that it was good.

This verse could also read. God made cattle and the beast of the Earth Eternally, after Their kind..... or the kind made Eternal by God the Trinity. It simply shows that beasts of the Earth and cattle are destined to be in Heaven, forever. We won't eat them, but they will be there with us.

FYI, Not knowing the difference between His kind and Their kind keeps most from understanding Genesis. I was born into the world because Jesus made Humans from the dust of the ground. I was born into life eternal in Heaven, by the AGREEMENT of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Genesis 1:26 Genesis 5:1-2 and John 14:16 That's God's Truth.

Once again you did your little dance and avoided the question. Let's break it into parts. Please answer each question separately:
1. Does Genesis 1:24 say cattle, beasts of the earth and creeping things are ALL "his kind"?
2. Does Genesis 1:25 say cattle, and only cattle are, in fact, "their kind"?
3. How do you explain this contradiction?

Kylie · Sep 9, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey kylie

Im curious what do you think is meant by 'us'?

And God said, Let us make man in our image

I think "us" is a word most people learn fairly early in their lives. If it's meaning is still unknown to you, then I'd suggest your communication skills are insufficient to be able to properly participate in this discussion.

the iconoclast · Sep 9, 2019

pitabread said:
That you would immediately jump to that conclusion suggests you already know you don't agree with their individual beliefs. So you've answered my question.

Hey hey

Unfortunately you are incorrect im unfamiliar not in complete disagreement. Why should i be familiar with every creationist view points?

pitabread said:
For someone so concerned with what people think of their fellow creationists, I find it odd that you claim to be unfamiliar with what they specifically believe and/or post on this forum. It's a contradiction.

How do i contradict? Who am i contradicting?

Cheers.

the iconoclast · Sep 9, 2019

Kylie said:
I think "us" is a word most people learn fairly early in their lives. If it's meaning is still unknown to you, then I'd suggest your communication skills are insufficient to be able to properly participate in this discussion.

Hey hey kylie

Haha nice!!

What does it ellude to, what is the context in that verse?

Cheers

the iconoclast · Sep 9, 2019

Bungle_Bear said:
Fairly simple, really. If you study the development of religion the pre-Hebrews were polytheists. There are several places where the bible refers to us/Elohim (a plural noun for gods). So the story is almost certainly based on an earlier iteration involving multiple gods.

Hey hey mighty bear

What reference do you have to back this claim?

Cheers

the iconoclast · Sep 9, 2019

46AND2 said:
Why is it incredulous that the God of Lightning creates bolts of electricity in the sky?

Hey hey

You did not answer the question and got distracted.

Here is the question again my dear.

Why is it incredulous that the God of Abraham created the Earth?

Cheers

Kylie · Sep 9, 2019

Aman777 said:
God in Hebrew is "Elohim" which is a PLURAL Name.

Please provide an external source to support this claim.

Many scientists today preach that magical chemical generation or abiogenesis is the Creator. Do you deny abiogenesis?

How is this at all relevant to what I asked you? I am trying to explain to you that people 3000 years ago could see that water is required for life. With water, things live. Without water, things die. It's easy to see. Stop trying to change the subject and address my point.

Once again, you have failed to post ANY evidence of your oft repeated false accusation. Pretty soon, your credibility will suffer. Amen?

Perhaps you would like to start a poll to see which of us has the greater credibility? I've seen lots of people on this thread agreeing with me. Haven't seen too many agreeing with you.

Kylie · Sep 9, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey kylie

Haha nice!!

What does it ellude to, what is the context in that verse?

Cheers

Sounds like one guy talking to at least one other guy.

Bungle_Bear · Sep 9, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Hey hey mighty bear

What reference do you have to back this claim?

Cheers

The Higher Criticism and the Verdict of the Monuments by A H Sayce is a good start.

pitabread · Sep 9, 2019

the iconoclast said:
Unfortunately you are incorrect im unfamiliar not in complete disagreement. Why should i be familiar with every creationist view points?

Because you're a member of this forum, and seem to be trying to offer morale support to other creationists on this site. I would think that would entail at least a minimal understanding of what your fellow creationists are posting. Do you not read their posts?

How do i contradict?

Defending other creationist but simultaneously being unfamiliar with their posting habits.

Your Thoughts on Creation & Evolution

Well-Known Member

and a discerning heart

Christian

and a discerning heart

Well-Known Member

Christian

Well-Known Member

and a discerning heart

Christian

Well-Known Member

Whoot!

Defeater of Illogic

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Atheism is weak. Yep, I said it

Defeater of Illogic

Defeater of Illogic

Whoot!

Well-Known Member

Similar threads