Another thing I don't understand about the creationist position...

[Diamond72]

You avoided my question

It is like a firing squad with machine guns the way people ask me questions that they do not want answers to.

 

[Diamond72]

Your basing your opinions on a then 50-year-old book you used in HS 50 years ago?

There is nothing in that book that is not on wiki today.

The systematic study of physics as a scientific discipline began during the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries in Europe. Do you base what you believe on something that goes back three or four hundred years?

 

[Diamond72]

This opinion (and not the opiner) is idiotic.

The Bible has not changed for 2,000 years. You have 66 books in the Bible written by over 40 people over 2500 years and they are all in agreement with each other and none of them conflict. Yet is it just about impossible to get two people on this forum to agree on anything.

 

[Bradskii]

The Bible has not changed for 2,000 years. You have 66 books in the Bible written by over 40 people over 2500 years and they are all in agreement with each other and none of them conflict.

It sounds like you haven't read it. Here's a few common ones to start you off:

“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.” — James 1:13
Yet...
“And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham…” — Genesis 22:1

“The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father…” — Ezekiel 18:20
Yet...
“I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation…” — Exodus 20:5

“Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of this mother…” — Deuteronomy 27:22
“And if a man shall take his sister, his father’s daughter, or his mother’s daughter…it is a wicked thing….” — Leviticus 20:17
Yet...
“And God said unto Abraham, As for Sara thy wife (his father's daughter)…I bless her, and give thee a son also of her…” — Genesis 17:15-16

“… with God all things are possible.” — Matthew 19:26
Yet...
“…The LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.” — Judges 1:19

 

[Hans Blaster]

There is nothing in that book that is not on wiki today.

It's the incompleteness of such a view on those topics that concern us.

The systematic study of physics as a scientific discipline began during the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries in Europe. Do you base what you believe on something that goes back three or four hundred years?

"Belief" is irrelevant. It is not an appropriate term, but...

Newtonian mechanics and optics work perfectly fine for a large number of things. Somethings require relativity, but that's over 100 year old now.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The Bible has not changed for 2,000 years. You have 66 books in the Bible written by over 40 people over 2500 years and they are all in agreement with each other and none of them conflict. Yet is it just about impossible to get two people on this forum to agree on anything.

I don't know why you do this to yourself. Even before you get to "no conflict" you have multiple errors.

None of the NT is as old as 2000 years. None. The *earliest* texts (the letters of Paul) are a decade or three away from 2000 years old. Some part of the NT may be less than 1900 years old, and none of them were compiled into "The Bible" for another century or so after that.

The number of authors is unknown. Many books have multiple authors or editors. Some groups are clearly written by the same person (Acts+Luke; the 7 letters of Paul).

Your time span of 2500 years is at least double the actual number, from about 1000 BCE or so until after 100 CE. 1100-1200 years.

(And there are 72 or 73 books, I forget which.)

 

[Belteshazzar(Daniel)]

The question you ask is relevant to the point I am trying to make. What if I was searching and believed I had found God. And He told me, in no uncertain terms, that your views on, for example, creationism, evolution and science in general were completely wrong. Would you then deny what God is saying?

God has already told us in Genesis, how He did it. Therefore, the answer is already found He told man and man wrote it down. So why would I accept a different god if you were given a different answer? Should I accept a god that fits your perspective of a god or should I accept the God that has already revealed Himself in the image of Christ? Died on a cross for our sin; rose again and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

 

[dlamberth]

The Bible has not changed for 2,000 years. You have 66 books in the Bible written by over 40 people over 2500 years and they are all in agreement with each other and none of them conflict. Yet is it just about impossible to get two people on this forum to agree on anything.

Protestant Bible has 66 books

Roman Catholic Bible has 73 books

Eastern Orthodox Bible has 78 books

Ethiopic Bible has more than 80 books

 

[AV1611VET]

Protestant Bible has 66 books

Roman Catholic Bible has 73 books

Eastern Orthodox Bible has 78 books

Ethiopic Bible has more than 80 books

AV1611 KJB for the win.

 

[Bradskii]

God has already told us in Genesis, how He did it. Therefore, the answer is already found He told man and man wrote it down. So why would I accept a different god if you were given a different answer? Should I accept a god that fits your perspective of a god or should I accept the God that has already revealed Himself in the image of Christ? Died on a cross for our sin; rose again and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

So God tells one person 'It's to be taken literally'. And to another (this will be a huge majority) 'It's a metaphor. If you want the exact details, use science'.

Now either one group is wrong. Or God is lying to one of them. That's impossible. So how do I know which group is wrong?

Spoiler alert: It won't ever be the one you're in.

 

[Diamond72]

AV1611 KJB for the win.

Do you really read the 1611 version of the KJB?

So God tells one person 'It's to be taken literally'. And to another (this will be a huge majority) 'It's a metaphor.

They are BOTH true at the same time. Some people say the Bible has up to 100 layers of meaning.

If you want the exact details, use science'.

Science is a method we use to study the Bible.

The scientific method is a systematic approach to conducting scientific research that involves a series of steps to acquire knowledge about the natural world.

The steps of the scientific method typically include:

1. Observation: Making observations about a phenomenon or problem that one wishes to investigate.
2. Question: Formulating a testable question based on the observations.
3. Hypothesis: Developing a tentative explanation or prediction for the question.
4. Prediction: Using the hypothesis to make predictions about what will happen in a future experiment or observation.
5. Experimentation: Conducting experiments or observations to test the hypothesis and collect data.
6. Data Analysis: Analyzing and interpreting the data collected in the experiment.
7. Conclusion: Drawing conclusions based on the analysis of the data and determining whether the results support or refute the hypothesis.
8. Communication: Sharing the findings with other scientists through peer-reviewed publications, presentations, or other forms of communication.

The scientific method is an iterative process, meaning that each step may lead to modifications or adjustments to the previous steps, and the process can repeat until a satisfactory conclusion is reached.

 

[Bradskii]

Do you really read the 1611 version of the KJB?

They are BOTH true at the same time. Some people say the Bible has up to 100 layers of meaning.

Science is a method we use to study the Bible.

The scientific method is a systematic approach to conducting scientific research that involves a series of steps to acquire knowledge about the natural world.

The steps of the scientific method typically include:

1. Observation: Making observations about a phenomenon or problem that one wishes to investigate.
2. Question: Formulating a testable question based on the observations.
3. Hypothesis: Developing a tentative explanation or prediction for the question.
4. Prediction: Using the hypothesis to make predictions about what will happen in a future experiment or observation.
5. Experimentation: Conducting experiments or observations to test the hypothesis and collect data.
6. Data Analysis: Analyzing and interpreting the data collected in the experiment.
7. Conclusion: Drawing conclusions based on the analysis of the data and determining whether the results support or refute the hypothesis.
8. Communication: Sharing the findings with other scientists through peer-reviewed publications, presentations, or other forms of communication.

The scientific method is an iterative process, meaning that each step may lead to modifications or adjustments to the previous steps, and the process can repeat until a satisfactory conclusion is reached.

You can quit the list making. Spare me. I'm not the slightest bit interested in reading them. And a literal reading and a metaphorical reading are not the same. They lead to different conclusions. And contradictions. Quite a few of which have been presented to you. Which you ignore.

Seems to be your MO. Ignore any comments that disprove anything you've said and print another list.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you really read the 1611 version of the KJB?

Affirmative.

 

[sjastro]

I use science to prove the Bible is accurate and true.

Science through archaeology does in some cases support the historical accounts given in the Bible.
Archaeology refutes Exodus and supports the ancient Egyptian version of events of a Semitic people existing in Egypt who were invaders and not slaves according to Exodus.

The Greek/Egyptian historian Manetho writing around 300 BC describing events that occurred around 1300 years earlier.

Manetho, from his book "Aegyptiaca"., frag. 42, 1.75-79.2

Tutimaeus [0]. In his reign, for what cause I know not, a blast of God smote us; and unexpectedly, from the regions of the East, invaders of obscure race marched in confidence of victory against our land. By main force they easily overpowered the rulers of the land, they then burned our cities ruthlessly, razed to the ground the temples of the gods, and treated all the natives with a cruel hostility, massacring some and leading into slavery the wives and children of others. Finally, they appointed as king one of their number whose name was Salitis. He had his seat at Memphis, levying tribute from Upper and Lower Egypt, and leaving garrisons behind in the most advantageous positions. Above all, he fortified the district to the east, foreseeing that the Assyrians, as they grew stronger, would one day covet and attack his kingdom.

In the Saite [Sethroite] nome he found a city very favorably situated on the east of the Bubastite branch of the Nile, and called Auaris (= Avaris ) after an ancient religious tradition. This place he rebuilt and fortified with massive walls, planting there a garrison of as many as 240,000 heavy-armed men to guard his frontier. Here he would come in summertime, partly to serve out rations and pay his troops, partly to train them carefully in maneuvers and so strike terror into foreign tribes.

Manetho labeled these invaders as Hyksos or Shepherd kings.
The Hyksos eventually controlled Lower and Middle Egypt while the Pharaohs preserved some control as vassals of the Hyksos in Upper Egypt.
Eventually there was a war of independence where the Egyptians were able to drive the Hyksos out of Egypt.
While there is zero archaeological evidence of the Exodus account, the presence of the Hyksos in Egypt is undisputed.

There is the widespread distribution of Hyksos scarabs throughout Egypt such as this example bearing the name of their king Apophis.

Then there is Kamose Stela describing the war of independence begun by Seqenenra Taa and Kamose.

Seqenenra Taa met a gruesome end.

Archaeology supports Manetho’s version except there was no invasion of the Delta but a gradual settlement followed by controlling the rest of Egypt.

New Research Reveals Surprising Origins of Egypt's Hyksos Dynasty

An analysis of ancient tooth enamel suggests the enigmatic ancients were immigrants, not invaders

www.smithsonianmag.com

 

[BNR32FAN]

The primary objection to evolution from creationists seems to be centered on human evolution specifically. For some reason the fact of sharing hereditary ancestry with other species causes creationists no end of grief.

However, if we didn't share ancestry with other species, why are we made of all the same 'stuff' as other animals? Especially in regards to our closest relatives (other primates), we share the same body plan, organs, cell structure, majority of our genetic makeup and so on.

If it was really important that we be distinct from other animal species, why didn't God make us wholly unique? Why not give us a completely unique physical makeup and genetic structure?

Evolution at least can explain this via genetic inheritance. Independent creation... not so much.

And before you say, "God just reused common parts":

a) Why would God reuse common parts in a manner that is perfectly consistent with genetic inheritance and biological evolution?

b) Why would it matter if we consider ourselves physically "related" to animals if we're all made from the same stuff to begin with?

If humans came from apes did we have apes one day then all the sudden these apes gave birth to a human or was there a transitional phase where apes gave birth to something not quite ape and not quite human that later evolved even more into humans? And why don’t we see any life forms that are still in between the developing stages? Basically where’s the missing link? The evolution process took place for millions of years then all the sudden stopped?

 

[BNR32FAN]

A lot creationists I engaged with on this forum seem outright offended at the notion of being related to animals.

Insofar as scripture goes, that depends on one's POV. IMHO, Genesis 1 clearly describes an evolutionary process involved in diversifying the biosphere of the planet.

No that’s not clear at all. What is clear is that everything in the entire universe was created in 6 days.

 

[Diamond72]

Archaeology refutes Exodus and supports the ancient Egyptian version of events of a Semitic people existing in Egypt who were invaders and not slaves according to Exodus.

There is PLENTY of evidence. Even if they did have a lack of evidence in a very Muslim country that wants to deny their "Jewish" brother of their birthright. A lack of evidence does not mean a thing. This is simply an antisemitic statement propitiated by the Muslim community.

 

[Diamond72]

What is clear is that everything in the entire universe was created in 6 days.

Five literal days that contain all time and all mysteries.

 

[Diamond72]

Affirmative.

Why don't you read the Bible in Hebrew? The language Moses used to write the Word of God.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why don't you read the Bible in Hebrew? The language Moses used to write the Word of God.

Why don't you read the Bible in Greek? the language of the NT writers?