Biblical Creationism and Self Deceit

[Aslan777]

Do you believe people rode on dinosaurs? Get back to the issue and tell me that Creationism is science. All that is going on in Creationism is a lot of noise while it demeans the view of Christianity.

You can't put God in a box! There is NO BOX! You keep demanding scientific proof of creation when there is NONE. There is also no scientific PROOF of evolution. That's where this word comes into play that is particular to those that are spiritual. Faith.

I mean no disrespect Givemereason when I say you are "essentially" barking up the wrong tree.

Christianity hopes and strives to see all mankind come to know and accept Jesus Christ as their saviour. It's obvious and for good reason our main tenet.

There ARE going to be people who can't get past the idea of one God creating the entire universe and therefore won't come to the faith. There are also going to be people who can't come to the faith because of any other numerous reasons (could've been me because my daughter choked to death at the age of 7).

Creation is NOT PROVABLE. I'm pretty sure God meant it that way. He doesn't want robots. He wants the people who figure out it's HIM!

Jesus is the answer to all of your questions. Silly as it may sound, Jesus is the way.

Peace brother

 

[Givemeareason]

You can't put God in a box! There is NO BOX! You keep demanding scientific proof of creation when there is NONE. There is also no scientific PROOF of evolution. That's where this word comes into play that is particular to those that are spiritual. Faith.

I mean no disrespect Givemereason when I say you are "essentially" barking up the wrong tree.

Christianity hopes and strives to see all mankind come to know and accept Jesus Christ as their saviour. It's obvious and for good reason our main tenet.

There ARE going to be people who can't get past the idea of one God creating the entire universe and therefore won't come to the faith. There are also going to be people who can't come to the faith because of any other numerous reasons (could've been me because my daughter choked to death at the age of 7).

Creation is NOT PROVABLE. I'm pretty sure God meant it that way. He doesn't want robots. He wants the people who figure out it's HIM!

Jesus is the answer to all of your questions. Silly as it may sound, Jesus is the way.

Peace brother

The misunderstanding might be in that I am not in the least trying to disprove creation. That sounds like some fundamentalist nonsense that's been planted in you mind. I encourage you to encounter some more moderate churches. I am only trying to discredit what has been called Creationism which is now a subject of great ridicule in the world.

 

[Shodan]

Doesn't have to. If you don't understand how radiometric decay rate relates to dating thats not my issue.

I do know how radiometric decay relates to dating. Your cite doesn't show anything about dating artifacts.

Google is your friend on the other papers. I have no obligation to track them all down and serve them all to you.

A statement made without evidence needs no refutation. You have no evidence to back up your position. OK, fair enough - we now know how seriously to consider that position.

You are right and since decay rates are now known to not be the constant they were claimed to be then that they might be accurate is unproveable so you can't argue that YECs have to accept it.

We don't know that the decay rates used in radiometric dating are inaccurate, since you have produced no evidence that shows they are. Your own cite says this has not been verified, has not been shown in the isotopes used in radiometic dating, and that even if the differences are accurate they are statistically insignificant when it comes to dating artifacts.

YECs don't have to accept anything - they can stick their fingers in their ears and shut their eyes real tight and keep saying "Nuh uh!!!" as hard as they like. The trouble is that when one does that, there is a real chance of missing what God is really up to. And that's a mistake, IMO.

Regards,
Shodan

 

[David4223]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has undergone a cleanup. If your post is missing, please review the CF rules before posting again, including:

Flaming and Goading
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
● Do not attack another member's character or actions in any way, address only the content of their post and not the member personally.
● NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, or smileys clearly meant to goad.

Remember to address the content of the post and not the poster themselves!

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Dave-W]

As a young-earth creation believer, and an engineer by education/training, I have no problem with how those without that faith cannot accept my point of view. I get that.

But what it boils down to IMO is whether you can accept the existance of miracles or not. Can God bring into existance a man (Adam) in a brief period of time (less than a day) who was fully grown? By the same logic could HE not call into existance a universe that appeared to be billions or trillions of years old in similar time period?

We believe in a God who's creative power is infinite.

But He also says that if one lacks FAITH, it is impossible to please HIM. So the "proofs," scientific or otherwise, are off the table. Knowing something by logic or observation of phenomena is not the same as biblical faith.

 

[Givemeareason]

As a young-earth creation believer, and an engineer by education/training, I have no problem with how those without that faith cannot accept my point of view. I get that.

But what it boils down to IMO is whether you can accept the existance of miracles or not. Can God bring into existance a man (Adam) in a brief period of time (less than a day) who was fully grown? By the same logic could HE not call into existance a universe that appeared to be billions or trillions of years old in similar time period?

We believe in a God who's creative power is infinite.

But He also says that if one lacks FAITH, it is impossible to please HIM. So the "proofs," scientific or otherwise, are off the table. Knowing something by logic or observation of phenomena is not the same as biblical faith.

I am a retired engineer myself. And I have no issue with what you are saying. The point of this thread was not to dispute faith but rather to expose the evil that Creationism (not creation) has come to represent. People who are following this thread will be in one of four groups.

1. The "how dare he defy God" group.

2.. The "he makes some good points" group.

3. The "Attaboy" group.

4. The "I don't care I just want to worship God" group.

My intent is to address groups 2 and 4 to let them know what Creationism really is so they can more aptly decide if they want to be associated with it or not.

 

[Dave-W]

OK - sounds reasonable.

 

[redleghunter]

No it doesn't, and I explained why it doesn't apply...you didn't respond to the reasoning behind that.

The creation story presents itself simply as the truth, I can only assume when you say "science" you mean occurring through natural processes? I am sure there were many natural processes involved but it still required God's hand to make it happen. The Bible explicitly says God formed Adam's body with his own hand and breathed life into him, he was not born from a parent's womb, so he did not evolve if that is how other animals came to be. For all the simplicity of the Creation story that is a rather specific detail to mention. This is when you have to question the authenticity of God's Word, not rearrange the creation story to fit the conclusion you draw from the evidence.

I don't see how the scientific knowledge we have of the creation of the world is out of line with a literal account of Genesis. It just seems to me we must either take it as truth, or take it as a lie...and if you take this as a lie might as well take all of God's Word as a lie.

Good points...especially your final comments above. That is why I mentioned the Resurrection of Jesus Christ and miracles in the Bible in my previous statements. The Creation was a miracle. If someone denies the Resurrection, then they won't even consider an uncreated Creator.

 

[redleghunter]

Why does creation scare you so?

Dawkins and the "Science guy" complain money going to studying Biblical creation takes away from 'real science' research. I guess it takes away from global climate change

 

[redleghunter]

However I maintain evolution is not conclusively proven, most notably concerning mankind, and Scripture clearly contradicts it. It's not forcing our views onto science, the science is incomplete and conclusions have been drawn by non-believers and believers who decided to compromise God's Word. If mankind evolved from the natural selection of previous species' offspring, that would make Scripture a definitive lie.

An interesting evolution debate:

 

[Givemeareason]

OK - sounds reasonable.

Good thing we aren't scientists. I would hate to have to hang my beliefs at the door every time I go to work.

 

[redleghunter]

I am a retired engineer myself. And I have no issue with what you are saying. The point of this thread was not to dispute faith but rather to expose the evil that Creationism (not creation) has come to represent. People who are following this thread will be in one of four groups.

1. The "how dare he defy God" group.

2.. The "he makes some good points" group.

3. The "Attaboy" group.

4. The "I don't care I just want to worship God" group.

My intent is to address groups 2 and 4 to let them know what Creationism really is so they can more aptly decide if they want to be associated with it or not.

So your intent, as an agnostic, is to come to a Christian website and proselytize your beliefs? It is obvious from your statements you are not here to debate but to make assertions and thus proselytize #2 and #4 above. Using such words as 'evil' without even defining the 'evils' of Creationism.

But I will leave it up to the mods if they are comfortable allowing an agnostic coming to their site, a Christian site and use unfounded terms as 'evil' in an attempt to proselytize.

 

[Givemeareason]

So your intent, as an agnostic, is to come to a Christian website and proselytize your beliefs? It is obvious from your statements you are not here to debate but to make assertions and thus proselytize #2 and #4 above. Using such words as 'evil' without even defining the 'evils' of Creationism.

But I will leave it up to the mods if they are comfortable allowing an agnostic coming to their site, a Christian site and use unfounded terms as 'evil' in an attempt to proselytize.

I think I have told you before I am working at becoming a believer. To claim that now would make me a hypocrit. And them I would have become lost before I even got started.

 

[MikeEnders]

I am a retired engineer myself. And I have no issue with what you are saying. The point of this thread was not to dispute faith but rather to expose the evil that Creationism (not creation) has come to represent. .

the problem is you have presented nothing but rhetoric to back your claim and refuse to offer any evidence - claiming instead that you don't need to which to anyone with any intellectual integrity instantly marks the claim as bogus.

 

[Givemeareason]

the problem is you have presented nothing but rhetoric to back your claim and refuse to offer any evidence - claiming instead that you don't need to which to anyone with any intellectual integrity instantly marks the claim as bogus.

As I have told you repeatedly the evidence is all around you. You build idiotic creation museums with the clear intent of deceiving people. You handicap your children by replacing the study of science with bible stories. The burden of proof is on you to prove otherwise. You have given absolutely zero scientific proof of what you claim to be science. That is why the world laughs at the feeble attempts. And that is why I am trying to expose it.

 

[JustHisKid]

As I have told you repeatedly the evidence is all around you. You build idiotic creation museums with the clear intent of deceiving people. You handicap your children by replacing the study of science with bible stories. The burden of proof is on you to prove otherwise. You have given absolutely zero scientific proof of what you claim to be science. That is why the world laughs at the feeble attempts. And that is why I am trying to expose it.

Evidence is subjective. You may believe people are arrogant idiots, but that is just your wicked heart bashing people for living their lives in a manner that is none of your business. You should get over it.

 

[Givemeareason]

Evidence is subjective. You may believe people are arrogant idiots, but that is just your wicked heart bashing people for living their lives in a manner that is none of your business. You should get over it.

I would get over it if Creationists would get over it and stop pushing their ideas as science. The deceit is undeniable.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Good answer. I see you are then a Theistic Evolutionist rather than a creationist. I respect your view however the problem we both have is that Christianity is being misrepresented by Creationists who are involved with deceitful arguments. It makes Christianity look bad as a result.

See my signature.

 

[JustHisKid]

I would get over it if Creationists would get over it and stop pushing their ideas as science. The deceit is undeniable.

It's really none of your business, and further, you aren't interested in how you are being deceived so the last thing you should concern yourself is how you think others are being deceived.

 

[JustHisKid]

I would get over it if Creationists would get over it and stop pushing their ideas as science. The deceit is undeniable.

They believe what they believe and they do not care about your opinion. Move on.