- May 11, 2015
- 17,420
- 3,593
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
How can you believe or not believe in what you admit you do not understand?
Upvote
0
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.
How can you believe or not believe in what you admit you do not understand?Yes, it is. And your question indicates that atheism is another subject that you do not understand. Let me help you. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods. I can assure you that it is a fact that I lack such a belief.
Floods happen all the time, and they drown large numbers of people and animals. Any book about natural disasters will tell you that.
How can you believe or not believe in what you admit you do not understand?
I'll stick with the book that describes a world wide flood.
Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse others of. It is called projection. Some consider it a law and under some conditions it is. It is considered to be one of the most challenging forms of self deception to understand. So no matter how you crunch the number you are the one that is guilty of not understanding. If you had not accused me I would not have known. When you accused me then you exposed yourself. This is one of those Bible principles that is well established in Science. Thus this is also an example of scientific evidence for the Bible. Not very often do I use the science of psychology as evidence but that is where you wanted to go with this one.What are you talking about? I understand what I post about. Clearly you don't. You make basic science mistakes when attacking evolution and now you are making basic mistakes about atheism, showing that you have no understanding of that either.
Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse others of. It is called projection. Some consider it a law and under some conditions it is. It is considered to be one of the most challenging forms of self deception to understand. So no matter how you crunch the number you are the one that is guilty of not understanding. If you had not accused me I would not have known. When you accused me then you exposed yourself. This is one of those Bible principles that is well established in Science. Thus this is also an example of scientific evidence for the Bible. Not very often do I use the science of psychology as evidence but that is where you wanted to go with this one.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...201110/the-essential-guide-defense-mechanisms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
The chemistry of you and your sect changing the bible?
Actually in the Bible the Hebrew word is Adamah. There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago. The date does not line up with Noah's flood around 4500 years ago. Although they seem to be tired together in some way. Just like today our global warming began around 12,000 years ago and this is just an extension of that. First the world was cleansed with water and soon the world will be cleansed with fire. Just as we are baptized and cleansed in water and then in fire.I'll stick with the book that describes a world wide flood.
Fossils are often found in the "death throse" position. The animals show signs of asphyxiation....head thrown back, hind limbs bent, tail extended. This stronly suggest rapid burial under muddy layers of now-hardened sediment which thwarted bacterial decay and predators. But then again you evos already knew that.
Don't be foolish. And quit playing childish games. Once again, I can support my claims. So far you have not been able to. But you are very good at copying arguments used against you. Now are you going to try to have an adult conversation here or not? It is clear that you are terribly ignorant about almost everything you argue about to date.Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse others of. It is called projection. Some consider it a law and under some conditions it is. It is considered to be one of the most challenging forms of self deception to understand. So no matter how you crunch the number you are the one that is guilty of not understanding. If you had not accused me I would not have known. When you accused me then you exposed yourself. This is one of those Bible principles that is well established in Science. Thus this is also an example of scientific evidence for the Bible. Not very often do I use the science of psychology as evidence but that is where you wanted to go with this one.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...201110/the-essential-guide-defense-mechanisms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
And no, there was not a worldwide extinction 12,000 years ago. There were some events that can be tied very roughly to that time, but to call it a worldwide event would be an error on your part. So citation please. Show me this worldwide extinction event.Actually in the Bible the Hebrew word is Adamah. There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago. The date does not line up with Noah's flood around 4500 years ago. Although they seem to be tired together in some way. Just like today our global warming began around 12,000 years ago and this is just an extension of that. First the world was cleansed with water and soon the world will be cleansed with fire. Just as we are baptized and cleansed in water and then in fire.
0127 // hmda // 'adamah // ad-aw-maw' //
from 0119 ; TWOT - 25b; n f
AV - land(s) 125, earth 53, ground 43, country 1, husbandman 2,
husbandry 1; 225
1) ground, land
1a) ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance)
1b) piece of ground, a specific plot of land
1c) earth substance (for building or constructing)
1d) ground as earth's visible surface
1e) land, territory, country
1f) whole inhabited earth
1g) city in Naphtali
The fossils are understood in relation to where they are in the geological record. The book I am reading is called: "The story of the Earth". The reason he takes this perspective is that all life came from the elements or the rocks of the earth. So when your looking at the 4.5 billion year history of the earth you have to follow the flow of events from the beginning.Right, awesome addition. So how did you explain the fossil record without evolution?
What claim do you think you can support that I am ignorant and don't know nothing? How absurd we are talking about the sixth extinction and we are talking about the Cambrian explosion. People who don't know nothing, don't know nothing about extinctions and explosions and many other area of science that we discuss all the time. Your claim that is a violation of the rules is beyond absurd.Don't be foolish. And quit playing childish games. Once again, I can support my claims. So far you have not been able to. But you are very good at copying arguments used against you. Now are you going to try to have an adult conversation here or not? It is clear that you are terribly ignorant about almost everything you argue about to date.
As I always tell creationists, when yo don't understand, ask questions, and do so politely.
What claim do you think you can support that I am ignorant and don't know nothing? How absurd we are talking about the sixth extinction and we are talking about the Cambrian explosion. People who don't know nothing, don't know nothing about extinctions and explosions and many other area of science that we discuss all the time. Your claim that is a violation of the rules is beyond absurd.
Again you accuse me of: "childish games". Which again means this is what you are guilty of. You need to study this concept a little bit better because you still have not figured this principle out. Again you are exposing yourself. That is fine with me if you want to reveal yourself in this way, but I am just not sure this is what you would consider to be in your best interest.
We are in the sixth extinction. It began at that time of the holocene extinction. I am reading the book:"The sixth extinction" that deals with all of this. It is a winner of a Pulitzer prize. Of course sense I am ignorant and don't know nothing about science then perhaps you can explain to me what the significance is of a Pulitzer prize. I am sure you know a lot more about "The sixth extinction" then I do. Actually I really have one question sense you offer. What percentage of the species went extinct during the holocene extinction?And no, there was not a worldwide extinction 12,000 years ago. There were some events that can be tied very roughly to that time, but to call it a worldwide event would be an error on your part. So citation please. Show me this worldwide extinction event.
As to there being a local flood that the Noah's Ark story was based upon, that is probably true. The flood and not the Ark. The Ark never happened and would have been superfluous if it was ever made.
Reading does not mean that you understand. Here is your error:We are in the sixth extinction. It began at that time of the holocene extinction. I am reading the book:"The sixth extinction" that deals with all of this. It is a winner of a Pulitzer prize. Of course sense I am ignorant and don't know nothing about science then perhaps you can explain to me what the significance is of a Pulitzer prize. I am sure you know a lot more about "The sixth extinction" then I do. Actually I really have one question sense you offer. What percentage of the species went extinct during the holocene extinction?
Why do I have more likes then you even though you have four times as many messages as I do?
I only asked one question. What percent of the species went extinct on a world wide bases so far in this extinction?Reading does not mean that you understand. Here is your error:
"There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago."
Please note that you used the past tense. The Holocene Extinction began about 12,000 years ago, it is still going on. Your sentence implied that it was finished when it just began. That is a hug error on your part.
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?