South Bound
I stand with Israel.
I don't think I ever "became" a Creationist. I just always instinctively knew that a design requires a designer and that things don't just magically appear from nothing.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How did you become a creationist?
PS. If you do answer, you are more truthful than I thought you would be,
and I would like to apologise for doubting you.
I don't think I ever "became" a Creationist. I just always instinctively knew that a design requires a designer and that things don't just magically appear from nothing.
I don't think I ever "became" a Creationist. I just always instinctively knew that a design requires a designer and that things don't just magically appear from nothing.
I noticed that the original poster consol said that most creationist if they are honest would say that they were born into it. That hey learnt it from their parents. My Dad was an atheist and my mum just didn't believe either way. I just happened to look at the moon one night and thought that had to be created. It just looked so alive and i could have sworn the moon then smiled at me.
I wouldn't have expected any other answer from a non believer.
How did you become a creationist?
PS. If you do answer, you are more truthful than I thought you would be,
and I would like to apologise for doubting you.
God is self-existent.Who designed your God?
No.Isn't that EXACTLY what you believe...? That your god magically 'spoke' the universe into existence from nothing...?
How did you become a creationist?
PS. If you do answer, you are more truthful than I thought you would be,
and I would like to apologise for doubting you.
Biggles is high on ridicule, low on facts.I wouldn't have expected any other answer from a non believer.
Like the number of planets the guys who 'rolled up their sleeves and worked so hard finding out' was wrong?We've actually rolled up our sleeves and done the hard work of finding out how the planets, moons, galaxies, etc, came to be formed, instead of satisfying ourselves with children's stories.... And what we've found out is far, far more awe-inspiring.....
No one has ever been able to disprove creation. There is the same amount of matter in the universe as there was at it's initial expansion or big bang, if you will. How far it will expand, we cannot know. We look at creation as we see our own creative powers at work. You are looking at a created thing. Everything you use was created. Everything is made of atoms. Every atom has a nucleus and highly charged particles rotating around it at an astonishing rate of speed, yet it does not fly apart. Something keeps it in uniform motion and intact. Our solar system is not unlike an atom, it has the sun as the nucleus and the planets revolve around it without flying out into space. Planets also have satellites , or moons that revolve around them. Looking farther out, Galaxies also have vast amounts of matter circling their centers.
Physical laws apply everywhere or nothing will work anywhere. These things cannot be random or chance. To believe that the universe just happened takes more faith in that than believing in a creator.
“The procession of life was never witnessed, it is inferred. The vertical sequence of fossils is thought to represent a process because the enclosing rocks are interpreted as a process. The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning, if it insists on using only temporal concepts, because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales.” (O’Rourke, J.E., “Pragmatism Versus Materialism in Stratigraphy,” American Journal of Science, vol. 276, 1976, p. 53) (emphasis mine)
The layers of the “geologic column” were dated before radiometric dating was invented. The index fossils were not dated radiometrically. Their age was assumed initially by the belief in evolution, how long they supposedly took to evolve. Then the rocks are given that age. The assumption that evolution is true is used to support an old age for the earth.
Well I was throwing in a bit of a joke with the smiling moon. But I am detecting some ridicule there which is uncalled for. The assumption that if a person chooses to believe therefore hasn't got a brain or uses it is unfair and quite harsh. Some of the greatest scientist are Christians and some of the greatest people who have given us some great scientific break throughs are also christians and believe in a creator God. IENo...you wouldn't have expected any other answer from someone who puts his brain to a purpose other than keeping his ears apart...!
Some of us over the centuries have gone a little further than imagining a 'smiling moon' .... We've actually rolled up our sleeves and done the hard work of finding out how the planets, moons, galaxies, etc, came to be formed, instead of satisfying ourselves with children's stories.... And what we've found out is far, far more awe-inspiring.....
Science is about what is observed and proven.
Micro evolution is the law of Biogenesis: that kind begets similar kind
Science does declare that no genetic information has been observed as being added to a living organism.
The 1st law of thermodynamics cites that nothing is created nor destroyed: so how can added genetic information come out of nowhere to insert itself in a given DNA to change that kind to another kind? It can't.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics reproves the notion that life is becoming more complex because what is being observed and proven is that any system left to its own devices tend to degrade.
The geographic chart as given in science text books does not exist anywhere in the world.
Science declares an explosion of fossils around pre-Cambrian & Cambrian periods that even one did say that it had to occur by an extinction event of a global flood.
With mass graves of fossilized whale bones with other fossilized marine life
fossilized animal life on mountaintops in South & Latin America, North Africa, Turkey & China,
Well I was throwing in a bit of a joke with the smiling moon. But I am detecting some ridicule there which is uncalled for.
The assumption that if a person chooses to believe therefore hasn't got a brain or uses it is unfair and quite harsh.
Some of the greatest scientist are Christians and some of the greatest people who have given us some great scientific break throughs are also christians and believe in a creator God. IE
Nicholas Copernicus , Galileo Galilei, Isaac Newton, Gregor Mendel, Albert Einstein, Francis Bacon, Ernst Haeckel, Louis Pasteur, Johannes Kepler, Max Plank.
Steve, there are many scientists who are Christian and believe in a creator God. They don't bring their faith into doing science however. This is what a number posting here have so much difficulty understanding. For millions of people, there is no conflict between science and religion.Well Some of the greatest scientist are Christians and some of the greatest people who have given us some great scientific break throughs are also christians and believe in a creator God. IE
Thank you Tellastory for as concise a listing of creationist half-truths, fables and outright lies that I've ever seen compiled.........well done...!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?