Creationist groups commiting false witness?

Follower of Christ · Apr 22, 2003

''A lion may be a horrible, vicious, predator... but it is an *excellent* horrible, vicious, predator. God said truly that it was good... Not *morally* good - it's got no moral state at all - but *good at being what it is*.''

The Scriptures:

For, behold, I create new heavens and new earth. And the former things shall not be recalled, and they shall not go up on the heart. However, be glad and rejoice forever in what I create. For, behold, I create in Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people. And the voice of weeping and the voice of crying shall no longer be heard in her. There shall not still be an infant of days, or an old man that has not filled his days. For the youth shall die the son of a hundred years, but the sinner the son of a hundred years shall be accursed. And they shall build houses and live in them; and they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build, and another live in them; they shall not plant, and another eat. For like the days of the tree are the days of My people; and My elect shall grow old to the work of their hands. They shall not labor in vain, nor bring forth for terror. For they are the seed of the beloved ones of Jehovah, and their offspring with them. And it will be, before they call, I will answer. While they are speaking, then I will hear. The wolf and the lamb shall feed as one; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And dust is the food of the snake. They shall not do evil nor destroy in all My holy mountain, says Jehovah.
(Isaiah 65:17-25 LITV)

And righteousness shall be the encircler of His loins, and faithfulness the encircler of His reins. And the wolf shall live with the lamb; and the leopard shall lie with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little boy shall lead them. The cow and the bear shall feed, their young shall lie together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the infant shall play on the hole of the asp; yea, the weaned child shall put his hand on the viper's den. They shall not do evil, nor destroy in all My holy mountain. For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Jehovah, as the waters cover the sea. And it shall be in that day, the Root of Jesse stands as a banner of peoples; nations shall seek to Him; and His resting place shall be glory. And it shall be in that day, the Lord shall again set His hand, the second time, to recover the remnant of His people that remains, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Ethiopia, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the coasts of the sea. And He shall lift up a banner for the nations, and shall gather the outcasts of Israel, and gather those dispersed from Judah, from the four wings of the earth.
(Isaiah 11:5-12 LITV)

Apollo Rhetor · Apr 22, 2003

Here is says "They shall not do evil" referring to the animals. How then do you marry that Scripture with your earlier statements? (addressed to seebs).

Arikay · Apr 22, 2003

So far I havent really gotten any creationist answers to my questions, so to re post them:

(Drdinos site is up again).

In the first post I linked to information that showed how DrDino and AIG are using false evidence to support their claims. Lieing to people.

Both these creationist groups seem to support using false evidence to support their claims and christianity.

Do you think its OK for a creationist groups to use false evidence to support their claims?
Do you think it is OK to use false claims to support christianity?
Do you think this is the christian thing to do?

seebs · Apr 22, 2003

Today at 07:54 AM tyreth said this in Post #42

Here is says "They shall not do evil" referring to the animals. How then do you marry that Scripture with your earlier statements? (addressed to seebs).

By recognizing that the prophets speak in metaphor and allegory.

Follower of Christ · Apr 22, 2003

Today at 08:46 PM seebs said this in Post #44

By recognizing that the prophets speak in metaphor and allegory.

So then, are you claiming that the entire passage is not in any way literal.

This one will most definetly separate the wheat from the chafe.

''For, behold, I create new heavens and new earth. And the former things shall not be recalled, and they shall not go up on the heart. However, be glad and rejoice forever in what I create. For, behold, I create in Jerusalem a rejoicing, and her people a joy. And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people. And the voice of weeping and the voice of crying shall no longer be heard in her. There shall not still be an infant of days, or an old man that has not filled his days. For the youth shall die the son of a hundred years, but the sinner the son of a hundred years shall be accursed. And they shall build houses and live in them; and they shall plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They shall not build, and another live in them; they shall not plant, and another eat. For like the days of the tree are the days of My people; and My elect shall grow old to the work of their hands. They shall not labor in vain, nor bring forth for terror. For they are the seed of the beloved ones of Jehovah, and their offspring with them. And it will be, before they call, I will answer. While they are speaking, then I will hear. The wolf and the lamb shall feed as one; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And dust is the food of the snake. They shall not do evil nor destroy in all My holy mountain, says Jehovah. ''
(Isaiah 65:17-25 LITV)

Is this a literal description or figurative.

''The wolf and the lamb shall feed as one; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox''

will the lion eat straw like the ox then or not?

seebs · Apr 22, 2003

It's *FIGURATIVE*. It has meaning, but it's not literal.

You're welcome to take it literally, but four thousand years of Judeo-Christian history says otherwise.

Follower of Christ · Apr 22, 2003

Today at 08:55 PM seebs said this in Post #46

It's *FIGURATIVE*. It has meaning, but it's not literal.

You're welcome to take it literally, but four thousand years of Judeo-Christian history says otherwise.

Lets not play word games here.

I know who it is who says its not literal.
The very ones who God has hardened for their unbelief.

Pete Harcoff · Apr 22, 2003

Today at 08:11 PM Arikay said this in Post #43

Lieing to people.

Just fyi, the word is "lying", not "lieing".

Arikay · Apr 22, 2003

So, FoC, Is it ok for creationist groups to lie and to use false evidence to support creationism and christianity?

Can you answer my three questions?

Arikay · Apr 22, 2003

LoL, lying, ok. Hmm, looks like a chinese word or name, L. Ying

Anyway, the question still stands (or lies

)

Today at 06:00 PM Pete Harcoff said this in Post #48

Just fyi, the word is "lying", not "lieing".

Follower of Christ · Apr 22, 2003

Today at 08:11 PM Arikay said this in Post #43

So far I havent really gotten any creationist answers to my questions, so to re post them:

(Drdinos site is up again).

In the first post I linked to information that showed how DrDino and AIG are using false evidence to support their claims. Lieing to people.

Both these creationist groups seem to support using false evidence to support their claims and christianity.

Do you think its OK for a creationist groups to use false evidence to support their claims?
Do you think it is OK to use false claims to support christianity?
Do you think this is the christian thing to do?

''Do you think its OK for a creationist groups to use false evidence to support their claims?''

FOC:
NO I do not.
Which is exactly why I have stopped having anything to do with Kent Hovinds ministry.
I do believe that a man can be mistaken and not know it. but this does not seem to be the case with Hovind as he keeps on presenting evidence that is invalid.
I also know that some get overanxious to prove Gods existance with extrabiblical proof.

''Do you think it is OK to use false claims to support christianity?''

FOC:
No.
I do think however it is good to attempt to show that the evidence can fit into a young earth.

''Do you think this is the christian thing to do?''

FOC:
No.

Now will you show me where I have presented any false claims to prove my beliefs?
I stand on the word of God alone.
If the evidence happens to fit, then so be it.

Arikay · Apr 22, 2003

Thanks for the response.

I actually didnt say (or mean) that you made false claims.

But I hadnt really gotten any creationist reponses, and since you are a creationist, and you happend to be on the thread, I asked.

Today at 06:24 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #51

''Do you think its OK for a creationist groups to use false evidence to support their claims?''

FOC:
NO I do not.
Which is exactly why I have stopped having anything to do with Kent Hovinds ministry.
I do believe that a man can be mistaken and not know it. but this does not seem to be the case with Hovind as he keeps on presenting evidence that is invalid.
I also know that some get overanxious to prove Gods existance with extrabiblical proof.

''Do you think it is OK to use false claims to support christianity?''

FOC:
No.
I do think however it is good to attempt to show that the evidence can fit into a young earth.

''Do you think this is the christian thing to do?''

FOC:
No.

Now will you show me where I have presented any false claims to prove my beliefs?
I stand on the word of God alone.
If the evidence happens to fit, then so be it.

Follower of Christ · Apr 22, 2003

Oh, okay.
I misunderstood then

Apollo Rhetor · Apr 23, 2003

Today at 11:11 AM Arikay said this in Post #43

So far I havent really gotten any creationist answers to my questions, so to re post them:

(Drdinos site is up again).

In the first post I linked to information that showed how DrDino and AIG are using false evidence to support their claims. Lieing to people.

Both these creationist groups seem to support using false evidence to support their claims and christianity.

Do you think its OK for a creationist groups to use false evidence to support their claims?
Do you think it is OK to use false claims to support christianity?
Do you think this is the christian thing to do?

Well, FoC responded, but I second what he said

The quite obvious answer, of "no" to all the above questions. As far as I have seen, the creationist ministries I follow seem quick to correct their mistakes in future publications - while evolutionist sources are very, very, slow to correct anything if at all.

Still, I'm not interested in saying "our side is better than yours". If you can show any false information being presented by, say, icr.org, answersingenesis.org, or creationscience.com, I would love to hear. Then we can test those particular ministries and see how quick they are to correct if at all when discovered wrong.

Apollo Rhetor · Apr 23, 2003

Today at 11:55 AM seebs said this in Post #46

It's *FIGURATIVE*. It has meaning, but it's not literal.

You're welcome to take it literally, but four thousand years of Judeo-Christian history says otherwise.

Ok, to use a metaphor, I feel like I am in a world induced under heavy narcotics if I am supposed to interpret those verses metaphorically - nothing makes sense or follows the laws of reality. By the way, why do you say four thousand years of Judeo-Christian history says otherwise? How?

For you to show that you have any credentials remaining, please answer the following:
1. How can we know when a particular Scripture is metaphorical or literal?
2. By what rule did you interpret those particular Scriptures as being metaphorical?

And please answer an earlier question of mine (if you did, please excuse me I missed it):
After the resurrection when we are made perfect, will there be any sadness, tears, etc, for those the Lord has saved?

Arikay · Apr 23, 2003

I really havent looked at the CSC.

However, one of the two things I listed in the main post was about AIG using false evidence to say K/Ar dating was bad.

On a different note,
One thing I did notice when looking at CSC though, was that they dont seem to understand evolution. As 8 of their "20 question to ask an evolutionist" obviously have nothing to do with evolution and there are others that are questionable.

Today at 12:10 AM tyreth said this in Post #54

Well, FoC responded, but I second what he said The quite obvious answer, of "no" to all the above questions. As far as I have seen, the creationist ministries I follow seem quick to correct their mistakes in future publications - while evolutionist sources are very, very, slow to correct anything if at all.

Still, I'm not interested in saying "our side is better than yours". If you can show any false information being presented by, say, icr.org, answersingenesis.org, or creationscience.com, I would love to hear. Then we can test those particular ministries and see how quick they are to correct if at all when discovered wrong.

LewisWildermuth · Apr 23, 2003

Today at 12:13 AM tyreth said this in Post #55

Ok, to use a metaphor, I feel like I am in a world induced under heavy narcotics if I am supposed to interpret those verses metaphorically - nothing makes sense or follows the laws of reality. By the way, why do you say four thousand years of Judeo-Christian history says otherwise? How?

Funny that is how I felt before I learned to look at the Bible in a more spiritual light... The Bible would say one thing but that wasn't the way it was in the real world. When I came to accept that the Bible still had meaning (in fact, to me, had much more meaning) even if it wasn't read as a history book, everything suddenly seemed to make a lot more sense.

For you to show that you have any credentials remaining, please answer the following:
1. How can we know when a particular Scripture is metaphorical or literal?

Click to expand...

Our brains, the only thing that we have ever had...

The history as laid out in the Bible may not be literal, we have found many things that were not since we can go and dig up every place mentioned, but the stories still did mean something to those who wrote them, and they still can mean something even today.

2. By what rule did you interpret those particular Scriptures as being metaphorical?

Click to expand...

Not being literal does not always equal being metaphorical, it's never simple...

But let's take one event... The 40 or so years of "wandering" (they camped out most of those years according to the story) after the Exodus. The Bible gives some pretty good landmarks for where they were, and archeological digs have been done all over that area. Some camps were found, but nothing that would even come close to 30-40 years worth of camping by thousands of people... So the Bible cannot be literal here, either there were far fewer people and they stayed far less than the time stated or they were in another area and the Bible had the wrong site. Either way the Bible is not literal history on this point.

And please answer an earlier question of mine (if you did, please excuse me I missed it):
After the resurrection when we are made perfect, will there be any sadness, tears, etc, for those the Lord has saved?

Click to expand...

I am not sure if there is or is not... Sometimes the Bible suggests that there isn't other times it seems there is...

God is perfect yet He is said to get angry or sad at times, so if we are made perfect like that we could also get sad or angry.

I'm not sure I would like a world without any sadness, in this world sadness and joy are so intertwined that I cannot imagine one without the other, so I cannot even say what it would be like if one or both were gone...

Apollo Rhetor · Apr 23, 2003

Today at 06:41 PM Arikay said this in Post #56
On a different note,
One thing I did notice when looking at CSC though, was that they dont seem to understand evolution. As 8 of their "20 question to ask an evolutionist" obviously have nothing to do with evolution and there are others that are questionable.

That's a bit vague, I'll need something more concrete to work with.

Apollo Rhetor · Apr 23, 2003

These questions were directed to someone else, but I'll respond to your answers:

Today at 06:54 PM LewisWildermuth said this in Post #57
Our brains, the only thing that we have ever had...

The history as laid out in the Bible may not be literal, we have found many things that were not since we can go and dig up every place mentioned, but the stories still did mean something to those who wrote them, and they still can mean something even today.

Funny, as far as I've seen the Bible history is vindicated the more archeological remains we uncover. Need more specifics.

Not being literal does not always equal being metaphorical, it's never simple...

But let's take one event... The 40 or so years of "wandering" (they camped out most of those years according to the story) after the Exodus. The Bible gives some pretty good landmarks for where they were, and archeological digs have been done all over that area. Some camps were found, but nothing that would even come close to 30-40 years worth of camping by thousands of people... So the Bible cannot be literal here, either there were far fewer people and they stayed far less than the time stated or they were in another area and the Bible had the wrong site. Either way the Bible is not literal history on this point.

Click to expand...

Far out. There was only like a million people or so in that exodus that died. And there was only a 40 year life period. How do you expect to uncover much? I'm betting that over the 3500 years or whatever since then most or all of it would be gone. I wouldn't expect to find anything. Remains only stay around mostly when they experience rapid burial.

This is one of the most obscure and extremely precarious arguments I have ever heard. I simply wouldn't expect you to find anything anyway.

I am not sure if there is or is not... Sometimes the Bible suggests that there isn't other times it seems there is...

Click to expand...

Where does it suggest there will be sadness and tears?

You guys are slowly proving more and more in my mind that evolution and Christianity is incompatible. Prove to me by what rule you can interpret Scripture to know what is truth and what isn't. "Use your brain" is a more than vague instruction. If there is eternal truth in the Bible, how do I determine what is truth and what isn't?

Please, present something I can look at so I can believe you guys have at least thought this through. I don't want to insult, it just feels that I'm getting more questions raised from adopting your view than questions answered.

Creationist groups commiting false witness?

Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a

Senior Member

HI

God Made Me A Skeptic

Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a

God Made Me A Skeptic

Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a

PeteAce - In memory of WinAce

HI

HI

Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a

HI

Literal 6 Day Creationist<br />''An Evening and a

Senior Member

Senior Member

HI

Senior Veteran

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads