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.
And who convinced this church that heliocentrism was right in the first place?Now we know they - the church - were wrong in their interpretation of the bible.
And who convinced this church that heliocentrism was right in the first place?
Or at least encouraged and supported heliocentrism?
In fact, where did heliocentrism come from in the first place, if not by empirical observation?
Your post makes very little sense. Heliocentrism came from empirical observation yes. The church believed in geocentrism at that time AV. Not heliocentrism. The church was wrong. Why do you insist you're right when there is no apparent substance to this claim?
Nebuchadnezzer II didn't even rule all of the middle-East. He didn't conquer the Persians, Lydians or Egyptians just on his borders, much less the rest of the world.
Where are you getting this stuff?
Ok.That's what it looks like to Him from His dwelling place in His temple set in the sun, just like the Word of God states, in the original language.
They are a poe.
They claimed this in another thread.
No one serious believes that the neo-assyrian empire reached Central America.
-- OOPS! I mean 'geocentrism' -- sorry.
Ye GADS; AV is using scientific methodologyAnd who convinced this church that heliocentrism was right in the first place?
Or at least encouraged and supported heliocentrism?
In fact, where did heliocentrism come from in the first place, if not by empirical observation?
It came from observations they had made. As a model it was flawed, was later proven wrong and eventually died. My point is that christians believed it was absolutely true and biblically confirmed that the earth is the centre of the universe. There are even verses which can easily be read to that effect. The church tried to stop scientific development because they had drawn a false conclusion from faulty and somewhat arrogant and egocentric reading of the bible.
They were wrong. The earth is not the center of anything except it's own gravity well. So my question is: Based upon what do you creationists claim absolute knowledge and infallible interpretation when there is nothing which supports your viewpoint? Read the bible a little differently and it no longer supports your conclusions while still retaining it's authority.
Am I claiming to have all the answers? No. I know I don't have them. I also know that the models theories and laws I use on a daily basis are also nought but approximations and assumptions. Compare it to two ships in a harbor. One is a paper mashie boat, the other a cruiser just back from a trip along the coast. Do I KNOW the cruiser will float when I board it? No. But I do know that the paper mashie boat will NOT. The same way I do not know that my experiments will yield the same results tomorrow as they did today, but it's a pretty safe assumption. Usually much more so than the analogy will lead one to believe.
No no no. You are talking to AV. See in AV's world anything that the church got wrong ever was because scientists told them the wrong info. Even if it was way back before anybody ever even thought of the scientific method it must have been a scientist who got it wrong.
It's called faith, guardian -- a word that I see you're quite familiar with.Based upon what do you creationists claim absolute knowledge and infallible interpretation when there is nothing which supports your viewpoint?
Whoa. I am new here and I am surprised by the level of animosity.It's called faith, guardian -- a word that I see you're quite familiar with.
And the more evidence-to-the-contrary, the more our faith shines.
I believe that when the Antichrist shows up, he's going to present macroevolution (coupled with a display of abiogenesis) so effectively, he will convince almost every single person on earth.
But there are 144,000 creationists who won't agree, and they'll be martyred for their faith -- as will Moses and Elijah.
So please feel free to gather as much evidence for macroevolution as you can possibly find, then we'll show you what real faith can do with it.
It's called faith, guardian -- a word that I see you're quite familiar with.
And the more evidence-to-the-contrary, the more our faith shines.
I believe that when the Antichrist shows up, he's going to present macroevolution (coupled with a display of abiogenesis) so effectively, he will convince almost every single person on earth.
So please feel free to gather as much evidence for macroevolution as you can possibly find, then we'll show you what real faith can do with it.
But there are 144,000 creationists who won't agree, and they'll be martyred for their faith -- as will Moses and Elijah.
They aren't that bad!Whoa. I am new here and I am surprised by the level of animosity.
Yes, and the two should not contradict each other.AV, don't you think that the earth reveals God's glory just as His Word does?
It does -- but how is it they understand the Truth of the 'ancient origins of the universe', when they claim that Truth doesn't exist, or tomorrow's paradigms will be different?What the earth reveals to scientists about the ancient origins of the universe must in the end come to the same place as the Bible does, which is to Truth.
I don't need a definition of faith, thank you very much.Faith is humbly accepting reality and glorifying God for what is, not ignoring reality and insisting that it is false.
I don't need a definition of faith, thank you very much.
Faith is believing something, even when evidence says otherwise.
And that's exactly what Paul was accused of, wasn't it?No, that's delusion.
*No AV that does not give any credence to creationism. Creationism as you promote it is not a possibility because it has been falsified. Just as the various geocentric models have been
Hi there! Nice to meet you!
They aren't that bad!
Yes, and the two should not contradict each other.
It does -- but how is it they understand the Truth of the 'ancient origins of the universe', when they claim that Truth doesn't exist, or tomorrow's paradigms will be different?
In addition, how is it they "understand" the Truth that the universe shows, but miss the Truth of the Scriptures?
Doesn't that strike you as a little ironic?
If they understand the Truth of God so much -- thanks to the universe -- how's come Jesus is everything but what He claims to be?
There is one particular thing they called Him years ago in a thread that was totally shut down -- that I won't even repeat to my wife; and it's even the name of a candy bar!
You'd think, if they have been studying God's Truth so much, they would be telling us what the Bible says -- not the other way around.
Instead, the Bible is ... well ... nevermind.
I could go on for hours on this subject.
And that's exactly what Paul was accused of, wasn't it?
Acts 26:24 And as he thus spake for himself, Festus said with a loud voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad.
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?