Could this generation of creationists be the last?

visa · May 30, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Whether I use the Bible, basic doctrine, or freethinking to answer you guys' unceasing questions -- I still get the same old ridicule in your replies.

Because you give such ridiculous answers, you might just as well tell us the fairy in the bottom of your garden told you as say the bible told you, just because you believe in the bible you expect everyone else to hold it in the same high esteem as you, well they don't, as far as they are concerned it's just another old book written by people who knew very little about what went on in the world they lived in.

Yours is just one of hundreds of religions all telling every other religion that the one they follow is the right religion.

Wake up AV1611VET and take a walk on the wild side, reality is out there and you never know you might even grow to like it.

What do you think of this guy?

Matt Dillahunty

I was raised in a loving, Southern Baptist home and was a fundamentalist Christian for over 20 years. After 8 years in the Navy and several years in the hi-tech game, I set out to re-affirm my faith with designs on attending seminary and continuing with a life in the ministry.
What began as an attempt to bolster my faith became a continuing investigation into more topics than I ever suspected I'd enjoy.
After the first couple of years, reason forced me to acknowledge that my faith had not only been weakened by my studies - it had been utterly destroyed. The thoughts, writings and wisdom of people like; Robert Ingersoll, Voltaire, Dan Barker, Richard Dawkins, Farrell Till and many others, helped free my mind from the shackles of religion without a single moment of despair. I continue to study philosophy, religion, science, history and the many other topics which have helped me to understand reality and enjoy my life.
Having spent the majority of my life compartmentalizing my religious beliefs to keep them safe from skepticism, it's thrilling to leave the critical, investigative, hungry portion of my brain turned "on". While my own pursuit of knowledge is a powerful driving force in my life, I'd also like to prevent others from wasting another day on irrational beliefs. Education is the key ...and if my work manages to educate even one person, I'm satisfied.
Anyone interested in reading further is encouraged to visit the counter-apologetics encyclopedia, Iron Chariots (wiki.ironchariots.org). Russell Glasser and I started the wiki and we encourage others to help us build it into a great resource for anyone interested in apologetics and theological debate.

I'm sure he won't mind me posting his story...........

Assyrian · May 30, 2011

Inan3 said:
Please show the website where you got these. I am not saying they are not correct but you are supposed to add the website when you copy and paste.

The need for attribution goes back a lot further than the internet, after all Josephus and Philo didn't blog What I gave you was the name of the writer, the name of the work I was quoting and the reference within the work.
Name: Philo of Alexandria
Title: Allegorical Interpretation
Reference within the work; volume, chapter and section: 1.2.2

Now as to Josephus' writings above it does not specifically say which "decent allegory" he was referring to. In other words, he does not say that Genesis 1 is an allegory.

He doesn't mention the word allegory anywhere else in his book although he has just introduced the work by saying Moses wrote in allegory as well as plainly. So the question is, are there any other places in Antiquities that Josephus may refer to these enigmas and allegories but without use those terms? and that is how his first century Gentile readers schooled in philosophy themselves would have understood his reference to Moses speaking philosophically. In the second creation story, it isn't about teaching literal history, Moses is using the story to teach philosophy, in other words allegorically.

He does say in "two" sentences prior to the reference you gave above (Josephus Antiquities of the Jews Preface 4) the following:

"Now when Moses was desirous to teach this lesson to his countrymen, he did not begin the establishment of his laws after the same manner that other legislators did; I mean, upon contracts and other rights between one man and another, but by raising their minds upwards to regard God, and His creation of the world; and by persuading them, that we men are the most excellent of the creatures of God upon earth. " http://www.biblestudytools.com/history/flavius-josephus/antiquities-jews/preface/chapter-1.html?p=2

This would agree with Genesis 1:26 that man was made in the image and likeness of God, and would disqualify that man EVOLVED from OTHER creatures.

I wouldn't be surprised Josephus didn't believe in evolution, though there is no contradiction between God using evolution and making us in his image. But the issue is not whether Josephus or Philo believed in evolution, but that we have prominent first century Jews from widely different backgrounds who didn't take Genesis literally. Remember you asked why would Jesus have taught six day creationism? Well if a literal interpretation of Genesis was important and was being abandoned by Jews of the time there was every reason for Jesus or Paul to teach the importance of six day creationism and taking Genesis literally.

As it is, all we really have is the fact that no one in the NT thought a six day creation was an important doctrine for Jesus' own disciples or the new church.

Assyrian · May 30, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Metaphor?
I think not.

God molded you from clay?

AV1611VET · May 30, 2011

Hespera said:
We do have skeletal remains of creatures who clearly were not modern humans but are eerily similar and we find them in a sequence from less to more human looking, up thru homo habilis, erectus etc, and modern man.

What does a reasonable person infer from that?

That they were real people that died from some strange disease that you guys can't find?

AV1611VET · May 30, 2011

visa said:
Because you give such ridiculous answers...

Don't ask ridiculous questions, then.

Like I have said many times: You guys know better than to ask questions that you know are covered by the Scriptures; so you ask questions that you know* are not covered by the Scriptures, then complain when we speculate.

Well, you get what you ask for, and if you don't like it, that's too bad.

I don't mind being ridiculed for my beliefs -- not at all.

* Once in awhile you guys will ask a question that is covered in the Scriptures but didn't know that. Then you either whine about it, or you just don't bother to reply with an acknowledgement.

In short, you guys whine at the Bible, you guys whine at basic doctrine, and you guys whine at freethinking -- then you wonder why we're used to it.

Nathan Poe · May 30, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Excuse me, but your pretense that you guys have 'heard it all' doesn't cut it.

I came here with something most people never even heard of, and still get the cold shoulder.

Acgtually you get laughed at -- there's a difference.

And since there's really nothing to it but self-serving blather -- yes, we have heard it all.

Whether I use the Bible, basic doctrine, or freethinking to answer you guys' unceasing questions -- I still get the same old ridicule in your replies.

Because you're just not as good a con artist as the average creationists -- know your limits, AV.

You don't fool me one bit, and you're about as see-through as a new window pane.

(In fact, all of you are.)

Awww... poor poor Creationist with the same old lament -- nobody treats him seriously.

(Ah, you knew I couldn't resist)

AV1611VET · May 30, 2011

Nathan Poe said:
(Ah, you knew I couldn't resist)

I know --

MoonLancer · May 30, 2011

AV1611VET said:
There are two people here in particular that do that, and use poor grammar and punctuation to tell us we're behind in science.

what does science have to do with punctuation?

visa · May 30, 2011

MoonLancer said:
what does science have to do with punctuation?

Being shown to be wrong is one thing, being shown to be wrong by an idiot is an altogether different thing.

Inan3 · May 30, 2011

AV1611VET said:
Don't ask ridiculous questions, then.

Like I have said many times: You guys know better than to ask questions that you know are covered by the Scriptures; so you ask questions that you know* are not covered by the Scriptures, then complain when we speculate.

Well, you get what you ask for, and if you don't like it, that's too bad.

I don't mind being ridiculed for my beliefs -- not at all.

* Once in awhile you guys will ask a question that is covered in the Scriptures but didn't know that. Then you either whine about it, or you just don't bother to reply with an acknowledgement.

In short, you guys whine at the Bible, you guys whine at basic doctrine, and you guys whine at freethinking -- then you wonder why we're used to it.

Joh 3:19 This is why people are condemned: The light came into the world. Yet, people loved the dark rather than the light because their actions were evil.
Joh 3:20 People who do what is wrong hate the light and don't come to the light. They don't want their actions to be exposed.
Joh 3:21 But people who do what is true come to the light so that the things they do for God may be clearly seen.

visa · May 30, 2011

If in doubt throw out a few irrelevant verses.
Ron 2:55 If creationists say something they are telling lies, if they say nothing they are thinking about telling lies.

Inan3 · May 30, 2011

visa said:
Being shown to be wrong is one thing, being shown to be wrong by an idiot is an altogether different thing.

That's just how we feel about you guys. Although, it's VERY SELDOM we are shown to be wrong. You just think you do and that is where we get a good laugh. Thank you very much. You're so cute and predictable!!

visa · May 30, 2011

Inan3 said:
That's just how we feel about you guys. Although, it's VERY SELDOM we are shown to be wrong. You just think you do and that is where we get a good laugh. Thank you very much. You're so cute and predictable!!

I'm glad to have been of help.

Liverpool socialist MP Bessie Braddock, once said to Winston Churchill, "Winston, you're drunk." Winston Churchill replied "Bessie, youre ugly, tomorrow morning Ill be sober but youll still be ugly.

In other words I can leave and forget this but you will still be a creationist with all that entails.

Inan3 · May 30, 2011

visa said:
I'm glad to have been of help.

Liverpool socialist MP Bessie Braddock, once said to Winston Churchill, "Winston, you're drunk." Winston Churchill replied "Bessie, youre ugly, tomorrow morning Ill be sober but youll still be ugly.

In other words I can leave and forget this but you will still be a creationist with all that entails.

http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/bessie-braddock+winston-churchill.jpg

The problem with that is that Churchill was both disgustingly drunk AND disgustingly ugly. He even looked just like her. So he had nothing to hang his hat on just like you.

In other words your wrong now and even if you insult me the truth remains, just as Churchill's insult did not remove the truth that he was disgustingly drunk. Bessie was right and so am I. That's what I leave with. I know I am right. I know my future and I'm not hanging my hat on something that is ugly and wrong as you are.

visa · May 30, 2011

May your God go with you.

Rudolph Hucker · May 31, 2011

visa said:
May your God go with you.

Dave Allen is alive and well.

Assyrian · May 31, 2011

visa said:
I'm glad to have been of help.

Liverpool socialist MP Bessie Braddock, once said to Winston Churchill, "Winston, you're drunk." Winston Churchill replied "Bessie, you’re ugly, tomorrow morning I’ll be sober but you’ll still be ugly.

In other words I can leave and forget this but you will still be a creationist with all that entails.

Although knowing Winston, he was probably drunk the next day too.

jpcedotal · May 31, 2011

visa said:
Given that scientists are pushing back the boundaries of ignorance further and further every year do you think that this generation of creationists could well be the last generation of creationists?

When you look at what has happened in the last 50 years it makes one wonder what the next 50 years will bring.

Please let's not argue for or against this advancment of knowledge let's just accept that it will come no matter what.

nope, we will here when science actually catches back up to the Bible.

Hespera · May 31, 2011

jpcedotal said:
nope, we will here when science actually catches back up to the Bible.

that will happen some time after the bible is completely re written to catch up with reality

AV1611VET · May 31, 2011

mathclub said:
that's not freethinking.

Okay, thanks for the 411 -- make it "theorizer" then.

Could this generation of creationists be the last?

Active Member

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

The Moon is a reflection of the MorningStar

Active Member

Veteran Saint

Active Member

Veteran Saint

Active Member

Veteran Saint

Active Member

Senior Member

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

Old School from the Backwoods - Christian Style

Junior Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency