Absurdities of so called science

[Split Rock]

Yes. But it took me more than 10 years to go from baptism to having a weak faith. And it took another 20 years to let the faith grow strong. Of course, I can answer you by saying: the Bible tells me so. But to say that only take 1 second.

To have a strong faith is how I know.

If you are so sure your faith is strong, then tell us... why are you here? Most creationists do not come to this particular forum to convert others. They come here to convince themselves that their faith is strong enough to stand up to atheist arguments and scientific arguments. So... why are you here?

 

[Hespera]

It took Juv 30 years to really start believing the impossible.

Heck, the Red Queen could believe two impossible things before breakfast.

 

[Chalnoth]

Statement 1 and statement 2 are not related at all. That breaks the inference. Statement 3 is a false conclusion after 1 and 2.

This is not even 101 stuff. It belongs to kindergarten level.

Then what is your logical argument for why the Bible is infallible?

 

[dad]

I thought about responding to you but you are too far gone.

Hey, try to save face all you like, if you can't win, maybe you are wise to stay down. No sweat.

 

[gaara4158]

Hey, try to save face all you like, you are whumped, something foierce, and are wise to stay down. No sweat.

Unable to defeat his opponent with a sound, logical argument, dad is forced to talk his opponent to death. If he uses enough falsehoods, cheap equivocations, and absurd metaphors, then his opponent may simply lack the stamina or patience to deal with them all. If this occurs, then dad has won and must therefore be correct.

 

[dad]

Agreed! My new year's resolution is to stop bothering with people like Dad.


I know... I know..... but who really thinks they'll accomplish any of their resolutions?

Resolve to grow a case. May the force be with you.

 

[dad]

Speak for yourself there, buddy.


It's very obvious to me that that picture is an accurate representation of the reasoning that claims that the Bible is God's Word, and is circular reasoning. So, why don't you spell out why this is not circular reasoning?

May our circle of trust go unbroken. Too late for your wheel of fortune pond fables, however, that circle is busted up real good, and can't be put together again.

 

[dad]

How about this:

The Bible is the word of god, because the bible tells us so. The bible must be believed because it is infallible. It is infallible because it is the word of god. The bible is the word of god, because the bible tells us so. The bible must be believed because it is infallible. It is infallible because it is the word of god. etc.

True or false. I can replace the word "bible" in the above paragraph with any book, and it would be just as "logical."

How about this:

The same state past is true, because the present laws tell us so. The same state past must be believed because it is infallible. It is infallible because it is the as the present state. This we know, because the extrapolations based on the present state tell us so. The bible must not be believed because it is it contradicts our belief, as utterly preposterous, and baseless as it is. The present state projected mentally on the unknown past is infallible because it is all present science CAN know. etc.


You are welcome to your beliefs, just stop foisting them on the innocent lambs as science. I mean that.

 

[juvenissun]

Statement 2 explains why we know the bible is reliable when the bible says it is the word of God. This is because the bible is infallible. Statement 3 explains why the bible is infallible.

Hey, if you think the logic is broken, then I agree with you! Why then do creationists is this argument all the time here?

If one do not string them together and calls it circular reasoning, then every one of them is true separately.

 

[dad]

Well I dont know that i want poor juv to blow a fuse but really, the guy does not have both oars in the water. I dunno what would happen to him if someone actually got thru to him that his construct of reality is as cracked as the liberty bell.

(did i leave out any metaphors i could have mixed?)

The old age godless fable meisters here have always struck me as evangelical. --Trying to destroy faith in God, especially in the new or weak believers. Ever consider the source of your inspiration?

Some know.

 

[dad]

Unable to defeat his opponent with a sound, logical argument, dad is forced to talk his opponent to death. If he uses enough falsehoods, cheap equivocations, and absurd metaphors, then his opponent may simply lack the stamina or patience to deal with them all. If this occurs, then dad has won and must therefore be correct.

To use a sound arguement, against something, it must be sound to begin with. How sound is your personal argument? Or do you have one?? I can actually talk cosmology, geology, physics, evolution, genetics, etc. At least enough to grasp what their insane conclusions are based on. And I am prepared to take the bull by the horns, and have done so. What have you done? Whine? Congrats.. You remind me of some creationists back in the day when the godless same state past foundation believers seemed to have the upper hand. My sympathies for having a losing, and embarassing case!

 

[juvenissun]

If you are so sure your faith is strong, then tell us... why are you here? Most creationists do not come to this particular forum to convert others. They come here to convince themselves that their faith is strong enough to stand up to atheist arguments and scientific arguments. So... why are you here?

Good question. There are multiple purposes.

One is to train myself on how to deal with atheist. I don't have this chance outside the cyberspace. I have to be "polite" to everyone and not to talk about religion.

The second is that I may learn some biological stuff here. At least I can understand the arguments better, which I don't usually hear.

Third, in case anyone has geological question, I can provide some answers. And, if I care to do, correct some erroneous geological arguments.

Fourth, ... etc.

One thing I don't need is to strengthen my faith here. However, surprisingly, my faith did get a little bit stronger by talking to you people over the past year. For that, I should thank you all.

 

[juvenissun]

Then what is your logical argument for why the Bible is infallible?

One can argue about faith with logic rules. But it does not take much to get to the very first premise: The Scripture is the word of God. For that, there is no logic to it.

 

[Hespera]

Hey, try to save face all you like, if you can't win, maybe you are wise to stay down. No sweat.

Nah. its just your huge shopping list of nonsense, all your use of !!!!! and ??? all your bold font and use of long rows of adjectives. it about wears out a person just to look at the mess.

I dont have face to save when a wild haired person starts shouting gibberish, which is the way you come across. There is no winning with such a person, there is only standing clear.

If you would like to bring out just one item that you think would falsify some aspect of geology / paleontology etc, please go ahead. We can look at that and see if you are capable of being rational. If you are, then your beliefs dont stand a chance.. If you cant talk in a sensible manner, then go babble on a street corner but not to me. i dont have time to talk with fools even if I am off my feet for a while here.

So.. you want to challenge me.. what do you have?

 

[Hespera]

If juv has information about geology perhaps he has data on how a world wide flood could have left no sign of its passing.

 

[MoonLancer]

One can argue about faith with logic rules. But it does not take much to get to the very first premise: The Scripture is the word of God. For that, there is no logic to it.

Then the heart of the argument has no logic? I agree. Their is no logic in assuming the scripture is the word of god.

I am glad we can both agree on this.

personally though i don't see how one can argue logically about faith considering faith is belief in something without evidence or in direct confrontation to it.

also, I have not seen a single argument for GOD that couldn't also be used for any other god or supernatural entity, like fairies.

 

[Chalnoth]

One can argue about faith with logic rules. But it does not take much to get to the very first premise: The Scripture is the word of God. For that, there is no logic to it.

Then why do you believe it?

 

[dad]

Nah. its just your huge shopping list of nonsense, all your use of !!!!! and ??? all your bold font and use of long rows of adjectives. it about wears out a person just to look at the mess.

I dont have face to save when a wild haired person starts shouting gibberish, which is the way you come across. There is no winning with such a person, there is only standing clear.

If you would like to bring out just one item that you think would falsify some aspect of geology / paleontology etc, please go ahead. We can look at that and see if you are capable of being rational. If you are, then your beliefs dont stand a chance.. If you cant talk in a sensible manner, then go babble on a street corner but not to me. i dont have time to talk with fools even if I am off my feet for a while here.

So.. you want to challenge me.. what do you have?

Enough to blow you out of the water if you actually present a case, on the table here, and now. What more could I want? False bravado is of little worth. Show the lurkers your stuff here. Go ahead, make my day.

 

[dad]

If you would like to bring out just one item that you think would falsify some aspect of geology / paleontology etc, please go ahead.

Sorry you seem to be new to the debate here. There is no need to falsify geology. Only to determine where it ceases to have support for what it dreams about in the unknown past. For example, can you prove that the present creep rate of the continents was in effect at the time of Noah?

Start with that. You have some surprises coming, at what you think you know.

 

[Hespera]

Enough to blow you out of the water if you actually present a case, on the table here, and now. What more could I want? False bravado is of little worth. Show the lurkers your stuff here. Go ahead, make my day.

I see you have not run out of your hyperventilated adjectives.

I challenged you; so why do you throw it back?

You are the one who started this thread with stuff like this-
"the utterly preposterous conclusions that so called science" i just asked you to back that up with even one real item. You know, something with verifiable data, not twisted "logic" and "coz the bible tells me" as a source.

So far you are like some guy across the street from the university holding up a sign that says something like "your science is stupid' and expecting people to come out and explain it to you.