Ask a former creationist

[TheReasoner]

Fair enough, Freodin.

I'm gonna have to pull rank on geology then: God did it.

yes he did. Not the way you believe though.

 

[AV1611VET]

yes he did. Not the way you believe though.

And what do I believe?

 

[BananaSlug]

Fair enough, Freodin.

I'm gonna have to pull rank on geology then: God did it.

One question. Why would God erase all evidence of his creation if Romans states his invisible qualities are visible in creation? Would you say your opinion of "God erased the evidence" is based in the Bible? Would you say your interpretation of "God erasing the evidence" was inspired to you by God?

 

[AV1611VET]

One question. Why would God erase all evidence of his creation if Romans states his invisible qualities are visible in creation?

Try from the creation:

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

And God didn't "erase" anything in Genesis 1.

The Creation Event did not generate any evidence.

The Flood did, but the Creation did not.

People would understand that if they didn't have the attitude toward my Apple/Moon Challenge that they do.

It just creates a mental block that manifests itself later as an error.

 

[Hespera]

One question. Why would God erase all evidence of his creation if Romans states his invisible qualities are visible in creation? Would you say your opinion of "God erased the evidence" is based in the Bible? Would you say your interpretation of "God erasing the evidence" was inspired to you by God?

oh now you know that the only way it could have happened is this "erased the evidence' idea.

its more honest than the people who try to make the grand canyon etc inot products of "the flood".

 

[BananaSlug]

Try from the creation:And God didn't "erase" anything in Genesis 1.

The Creation Event did not generate any evidence.

The Flood did, but the Creation did not.

People would understand that if they didn't have the attitude toward my Apple/Moon Challenge that they do.

It just creates a mental block that manifests itself later as an error.

Did God clean up evidence of the flood or not? Is that your opinion about the creation event not generating evidence, or did God give you that information when you prayed?

 

[sandwiches]

Fair enough, Freodin.

I'm gonna have to pull rank on geology then: God did it.

Translation: I give up.

I really don't know why AV comes up with all these convoluted and nonsensical explanations and jumps through all kinds of fallacy hoops and loops, when every time he's painted himself into a corner, he simply gives up. I'm guessing it must be painful having such horrendous cognitive dissonance.

I mean, he thinks he's already got the answer. Why try to invent and then defend nonsense like embedded age, when it doesn't matter to him whether his explanation makes any kind of sense since he's already convinced and his one-size-fits-all answer solves it all.

Seriously, I think AV may been trolling everyone all this time.

 

[AV1611VET]

Did God clean up evidence of the flood or not?

I use my Boolean Standards to say He did.

In other words, since science says there is no evidence, I'll go with what they say.

If tomorrow, scientists find evidence of a worldwide flood, then tomorrow I'll be saying God [in my opinion] left evidence.

(I have a feeling you guys who think I abhor science will not understand what I just wrote.)

Is that your opinion about the creation event not generating evidence, or did God give you that information when you prayed?

Actually, you guys helped me understand the relationship of evidence to creatio ex nihilo, when you treated my Apple Challenge like you did.

I came to the conclusion that if there was evidence generated, you would certainly have provided it.

So, in my opinion, the Creation Event did not generate any science.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Fair enough, Freodin.

I'm gonna have to pull rank on geology then: God did it.

How is this "pulling rank"?

 

[AV1611VET]

Seriously, I think AV may been trolling everyone all this time.

In all honesty, sandwiches, that's not fair to the other guys to say that.

Some of these people, like Split Rock, Freodin, Cabal, Nathan Poe, and Thaumaturgy have put up with my "trolling" for years.

And for someone who just recently joined to come here and say that is ... well ... not taking into consideration the aforementioned guys who [probably] do not think I'm trolling, and are trying their best.

They know me better than you do, and their disgust of me carries more weight than a newbie who joins and acts just as disgusted as they are.

 

[BananaSlug]

I use my Boolean Standards to say He did.

In other words, since science says there is no evidence, I'll go with what they say.

If tomorrow, scientists find evidence of a worldwide flood, then tomorrow I'll be saying God [in my opinion] left evidence.

(I have a feeling you guys who think I abhor science will not understand what I just wrote.)Actually, you guys helped me understand the relationship of evidence to creatio ex nihilo, when you treated my Apple Challenge like you did.

I came to the conclusion that if there was evidence generated, you would certainly have provided it.

So, in my opinion, the Creation Event did not generate any science.

Okay.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Some of these people, like Split Rock, Freodin, Cabal, Nathan Poe, and Thaumaturgy have put up with my "trolling" for years.

True that.

And for someone who just recently joined to come here and say that is ... well ... not taking into consideration the aforementioned guys who [probably] do not think I'm trolling, and are trying their best.

Speaking only for myself, I'm not sure there's a way I can correct your mistake here without earning myself a yellow card.

They know me better than you do, and their disgust of me carries more weight than a newbie who joins and acts just as disgusted as they are.

Personally, I give sandwiches credit for being a quick study. Again, speaking for myself, the only reason I engage in debates with you is for the benefit of "newbies" like him.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I use my Boolean Standards to say He did.

Again, AV -- "Boolean" is not the right word here to describe your standards -- although the appropriate word does in fact begin with a "B," so I can understand your mistake.

In other words, since science says there is no evidence, I'll go with what they say.

If tomorrow, scientists find evidence of a worldwide flood, then tomorrow I'll be saying God [in my opinion] left evidence.

(I have a feeling you guys who think I abhor science will not understand what I just wrote.)

I thought you were in the habit of criticizing science for being inconsistent and ever-changing?

Actually, you guys helped me understand the relationship of evidence to creatio ex nihilo, when you treated my Apple Challenge like you did.

Indeed -- we treated it like a joke, which is what science does to wild ideas without even a shred of evidence.

I came to the conclusion that if there was evidence generated, you would certainly have provided it.

And you've shown us the relationship of evidence to creationism -- absolutely none whatsoever.

So, in my opinion, the Creation Event did not generate any science.

Except that the Creation event did generate evidence -- and the evidence "pwns" a literal reading of Genesis 1.

 

[BananaSlug]

Again, AV -- "Boolean" is not the right word here to describe your standards -- although the appropriate word does in fact begin with a "B," so I can understand your mistake.



I thought you were in the habit of criticizing science for being inconsistent and ever-changing?



Indeed -- we treated it like a joke, which is what science does to wild ideas without even a shred of evidence.



And you've shown us the relationship of evidence to creationism -- absolutely none whatsoever.



Except that the Creation event did generate evidence -- and the evidence "pwns" a literal reading of Genesis 1.

HEAR, HEAR!!!!!!

 

[HappyCat]

Like I said... more harm than good and he doesn't even realize it.

Depends how you define harm. Personally I think he's probably doing a lot of good by demonstrating the total intellectual bankruptcy of so-called Bible literalism. Over and over again.

 

[sandwiches]

In all honesty, sandwiches, that's not fair to the other guys to say that.

Some of these people, like Split Rock, Freodin, Cabal, Nathan Poe, and Thaumaturgy have put up with my "trolling" for years.

And for someone who just recently joined to come here and say that is ... well ... not taking into consideration the aforementioned guys who [probably] do not think I'm trolling, and are trying their best.

They know me better than you do, and their disgust of me carries more weight than a newbie who joins and acts just as disgusted as they are.

First off, I don't need your permission or clearance to find you a troll. Second, I actually thought you might be trolling BEFORE I even signed up to the forums a few months ago. Third, I don't find you disgusting. Again, I find you a troll. I simply cannot believe that a real person would truly believe what you claim you do and like I said, I cannot believe that anyone who's last resort answer is "god did it" would come up with and defend such unsupportable and illogical, yet complicated explanations for pretty much everything.

 

[Wedjat]

I simply cannot believe that a real person would truly believe what you claim you do and like I said, I cannot believe that anyone who's last resort answer is "god did it" would come up with and defend such unsupportable and illogical, yet complicated explanations for pretty much everything.

This is an issue easily amended by reducing the amount of faith you have in humanity. You see, currently your levels are too high, the reason you "simply cannot believe..." is because you haven't seen the kind of illogic that people are capable of, or you have and you choose to believe they are freak occurrences when they are anything but. Loose some of your esteem for the average human intellect then come back to this and you'll see that AV is no more a troll than the rest of us.
Cynicism is the spice of life.

 

[AV1611VET]

Again, I find you a troll.

If you think I'm emitting µL*, may I suggest

?

* microLenat

 

[Hespera]

This is an issue easily amended by reducing the amount of faith you have in humanity. You see, currently your levels are too high, the reason you "simply cannot believe..." is because you haven't seen the kind of illogic that people are capable of, or you have and you choose to believe they are freak occurrences when they are anything but. Loose some of your esteem for the average human intellect then come back to this and you'll see that AV is no more a troll than the rest of us.
Cynicism is the spice of life.

I have relatives who still have not given up on the cultural revolution and Mao.

A person starts out with absolutist beliefs in a cult leader and it takes them far far astray I guess.

As for cynicism, my dad says its just the scabby side of naivite.

But then your observation about people wasnt cynical.

 

[sandwiches]

If you think I'm emitting µL*, may I suggest

?

* microLenat

Well, if you are a troll, I think it'd be a waste of time to report you since I think that the mods won't see it that way. They'll probably think you're a very fervent believer. I guess this is Poe's law at work, where your beliefs seem so detached from reality that I am practically certain you're merely parodying a true religious person.

At any rate, I'm over it now.