Are there any creationists willing to debate?

[lucaspa]

They don't, but the word says that it took 6 days. You can't say for sure that the writers of the bible were not inspired, the bible says they were.

Genesis 1 says it took 6 days because the authors were justifying the Sabbath. Exodus came before Genesis in the history of Israel. IOW, Israel had already undergone the Exodus before anyone was inspired to write about creation. So they already had the Sabbath.

I don't weigh the bible more heavily, but without it, we wouldn't know the creation was done by God, we wouldn't know anything about God,

YES! This is theology. The Bible teaches theology, not science. The creation stories tell you God created and why. They tell you ABOUT GOD and about man's relationship to God. Let science tell you how God created. Science doesn't change any of the theology.

 

[lucaspa]

what i was asking was not could God create them like that, i know he can. i was asking can rocks form naturally like that?

You mean to look older than they are? No.

 

[lucaspa]

This guy simple does not believe in the power of God or understand that He is timeless not bound by time as we are. that his word from mouth wiped out armies in Rev 19:21 ....bible=sword=john 1:1-3

That's FUTURE tense for Revelations: will wipe out. Remember, Revelations is a vision of the future, not history.

Now, is "this guy" me? If so, then you didn't read my post carefully. I never argued against the power of God. I simply argued against the desire of God to lie and deceive. Please read it again carefully:

Originally Posted By: lucaspa

Not at all. What you are overestimating is the power of God to lie.

What you are saying is that God made all these things in an instant even tho they LOOK LIKE they took a long time to make. That makes God lying.

I simply am not wedded to a literalistic interpretation of the Bible to the extent that I am willing to destroy all of Christianity in order to win a debate. I would rather discard an obvious incorrect human literal interpretation rather than stick with it out of human pride and have to make God out to be a liar -- which we both know He is not.

What we see in God's Creation is how it really is.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

If the rock is made with the ratios of parent and daughter isotopes (different forms of the atom, the parent isotope being radioactive and the daughter being the atom after it has decayed), then we are back to God being a deceiver again. God had to deliberately create it that way to make it LOOK old when it is not.

Now you have made God into a deceiver. Science can stand this, but Christianity cannot. Are you really willing to destroy Christianity in order to keep your literal interpretation of Genesis?

These sites will help you understand radiometric dating. The first is the American Scientific Affiliate -- an organization of evangelical Christian scientists

4. http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html
5. http://www.tim-thompson.com/radiometric.html

or maybe, just maybe, God knows way way more than you about everything. he knows what to create and how to make this universe work.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

you guys really need to get off the "God is lying to us all" notion. we arent as smart as God is. maybe these things couldve happened within these timeframes in ways you havent thought of yet. like i said before, just because you suck at interpreting data doesnt mean God is lying to us.
besides, accusing people of lying isnt very cool, accusing God of lying is flat out moronic.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

also, for emphasis, GOD CAN DO ALL THINGS! STOP PUTTING HIM WITHIN OUR LAWS OF PHYSICS!!!!!!

 

[Pete Harcoff]

you guys really need to get off the "God is lying to us all" notion. we arent as smart as God is. maybe these things couldve happened within these timeframes in ways you havent thought of yet. like i said before, just because you suck at interpreting data doesnt mean God is lying to us.
besides, accusing people of lying isnt very cool, accusing God of lying is flat out moronic.

No one is accusing God of lying. However, for people that subscribe to Biblical literalism (specifically a literal interpretation of Genesis), then either the men who wrote Genesis are wrong, God is wrong, or He deliberately made His Creation to look like He did not create it.

Either way, you've got some serious theological implications, and none of them are pretty.

Of course, the other option is that Genesis was not meant as literal history, and instead meant to convey a theological message to a largely illiterate and ignorant population (at the time it was written). So, maybe it's you who "sucks" at interpreting the Bible. After all, you're a fallible human just like the rest of us.

 

[Jet Black]

also, for emphasis, GOD CAN DO ALL THINGS! STOP PUTTING HIM WITHIN OUR LAWS OF PHYSICS!!!!!!

stop saying that nature is independent of God... atheists do that.

 

[OldBadfish]

also, for emphasis, GOD CAN DO ALL THINGS! STOP PUTTING HIM WITHIN OUR LAWS OF PHYSICS!!!!!!

NO kidding! Sheesh.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

stop saying that nature is independent of God... atheists do that.

i dont understand what you mean. nature independent of God? thats not what i meant. i meant that all these evolutionists say they disprove ex nihilo creation because of the laws of physics and all this junk about science. but God isnt under our laws of physics or anything, he made them for us.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

No one is accusing God of lying. However, for people that subscribe to Biblical literalism (specifically a literal interpretation of Genesis), then either the men who wrote Genesis are wrong, God is wrong, or He deliberately made His Creation to look like He did not create it.

Either way, you've got some serious theological implications, and none of them are pretty.

Of course, the other option is that Genesis was not meant as literal history, and instead meant to convey a theological message to a largely illeritate and ignorant population (at the time it was written). So, maybe it's you who "sucks" at interpreting the Bible. After all, you're a fallible human just like the rest of us.

the other option is that the Genesis story is literal, and God left the evidence for it, but you are interpreting it wrong.

 

[Tinker Grey]

The problem with your assertion, fortheloveofmike, is that this makes man out to be pretty stupid. Granted we will never be as smart as God, but we ain't dumb.

We've put man on the moon, we've cured diseases (we've wiped out small pox -- gotta work on that monkey pox), more than 2000 yrs ago the Greeks knew that the earth is spherical and the earth revolves around the sun. Even though Newton wasn't entirely correct about physics, he was close enough for anything we can physically touch.

You are typing on a computer, communicating with fellow Christians around the globe based on the smarts that God gave us.

The fact that I, and others, accept that within a margin of error that man can interpret the data pretty accurately is a tribute to the God that made us what we are (however he did it.) I have faith that God gave man an intellect that does not fail in the face of adequate information. That is, God gave men brains to use. God made us as creatures that interpret evidence.

To stop interpretting evidence, to stop learning and investigating, is an insult to God himself.

Tinker

 

[goat37]

i dont understand what you mean. nature independent of God? thats not what i meant. i meant that all these evolutionists say they disprove ex nihilo creation because of the laws of physics and all this junk about science. but God isnt under our laws of physics or anything, he made them for us.

Your invisible omniscient God MAY not follow our laws of physics, but the earth and the universe we live in DO follow them, that's why physics exists.

You say that we suck at interpreting data? You honestly have absolutely no idea how much time was spent falsifying creationism, it WAS the accepted theory until parts of it could not have happened, and they found an explanation that actually works and supports current observations.

You keep claiming that evolution has no basis and no evidence... it DOES! You have been given many websites and resources to educate yourself with, have you even looked at them? I would be willing to bet no. Your theory of creationism doesn't stand up to any kind of physical scrutiny, that's why it is a falsified theory. Just because you want to believe it, doesn't make it true.

Do you know why the Indian rain dance worked so well? Because they didn't stop dancing until it rained...

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

the other option is that the Genesis story is literal, and God left the evidence for it, but you are interpreting it wrong.

So why don't you give us the "right" intrepretation of those facts of geology the Mechanical Bliss has pointed out?
http://www.christianforums.com/t41209&page=1

Give us the "right" interpretation of the fossil record as a flood based deposit.

http://www.christianforums.com/t42599&page=1&highlight=coincidences

Give us the "right" interpretation of biogeography.

http://www.christianforums.com/t40474&page=1

You can't do it and neither can any other YEC because there is no way to explain these facts of the world in the YEC framework and these are only a tiny fraction of the facts with no YEC interpretations that make sense. Over and over the "interpretation excuse" is put forward by YECs but the actual interpretations are either never given or easily shown to be false. Why do you suppose that is? The answer seems pretty obvious. The earth is about 4.5 billion years old and there has been no worldwide flood at least in the last few million years.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

 

[fortheloveofmike]

The problem with your assertion, fortheloveofmike, is that this makes man out to be pretty stupid. Granted we will never be as smart as God, but we ain't dumb.

We've put man on the moon, we've cured diseases (we've wiped out small pox -- gotta work on that monkey pox), more than 2000 yrs ago the Greeks knew that the earth is spherical and the earth revolves around the sun. Even though Newton wasn't entirely correct about physics, he was close enough for anything we can physically touch.

You are typing on a computer, communicating with fellow Christians around the globe based on the smarts that God gave us.

The fact that I, and others, accept that within a margin of error that man can interpret the data pretty accurately is a tribute to the God that made us what we are (however he did it.) I have faith that God gave man an intellect that does not fail in the face of adequate information. That is, God gave men brains to use. God made us as creatures that interpret evidence.

To stop interpretting evidence, to stop learning and investigating, is an insult to God himself.

Tinker

so you believe God made humans uniquely and in his own image?

 

[Pete Harcoff]

the other option is that the Genesis story is literal, and God left the evidence for it, but you are interpreting it wrong.

As Frumious has already pointed out, considering the number of falsifications of creationism that creationists routinely ignore, I doubt this is the case. But you're welcome to have a try.

 

[Tinker Grey]

so you believe God made humans uniquely and in his own image?

God could have made any universe. He chose this universe. I believe he chose it knowing that this universe and no other would bring you and me about.

By setting the initial conditions, he chose and uniquely made us.

I do not believe, however, that that creation was separate. Nor does it need to be for us to be special to God.

Tinker

PS. I should note that this is an article of faith for me. I do not believe that we have any evidence of this other than faith. It is not provable. It is not science. It is faith. And that's ok with me.

 

[Apollo Rhetor]

Pete Harcoff, I sent you an email about debate, just posting here in case you didn't get it. Send me a PM or email to reply, I won't read any replies in this thread.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

God could have made any universe. He chose this universe. I believe he chose it knowing that this universe and no other would bring you and me about.

By setting the initial conditions, he chose and uniquely made us.

I do not believe, however, that that creation was separate. Nor does it need to be for us to be special to God.

Tinker

PS. I should note that this is an article of faith for me. I do not believe that we have any evidence of this other than faith. It is not provable. It is not science. It is faith. And that's ok with me.

i agree with you about the faith issue. i respect that you are not trying to say "ive proved such and such blah blah blah". i rely on just as much faith as the next guy also.

 

[fortheloveofmike]

So why don't you give us the "right" intrepretation of those facts of geology the Mechanical Bliss has pointed out?
http://www.christianforums.com/t41209&page=1

Give us the "right" interpretation of the fossil record as a flood based deposit.

http://www.christianforums.com/t42599&page=1&highlight=coincidences

Give us the "right" interpretation of biogeography.

http://www.christianforums.com/t40474&page=1

You can't do it and neither can any other YEC because there is no way to explain these facts of the world in the YEC framework and these are only a tiny fraction of the facts with no YEC interpretations that make sense. Over and over the "interpretation excuse" is put forward by YECs but the actual interpretations are either never given or easily shown to be false. Why do you suppose that is? The answer seems pretty obvious. The earth is about 4.5 billion years old and there has been no worldwide flood at least in the last few million years.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

easy...God made it, i dont know when, but i do know how. if you want to know how, read the bible.