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.
Well considering that I have admitted to problems with some of my interpretations and the current evidence proves you wrong. Also, in the past the current thought did not support my position. So in both cases you are proven incorrect.
And according to several things like the one I gave you, it is possible. So why don't we stop arguing about it and let the physicists fight about it.Well I certainly understand that it is an interesting consideration but the fact is that it doesn't seem real possible considering several things like the one I gave you.
Some problems? Nearly the entire order of creation is wrong. That is more than "some".
And according to several things like the one I gave you, it is possible. So why don't we stop arguing about it and let the physicists fight about it.
No, the universe did not create anything. Nor was the universe created. It has always existed. It expands and contracts. This particular expansion/contraction cycle has lasted ~14B years so far. That's what this particular model of the universe hypothesizes.
Let's see how you twist this...
Fine, how about we stop this congenial, but pointless, discussion about the Cyclic Model?Are we arguing? I thought we were having a very congenial discussion...who knew.
Not really.
Yes, but the creation of the current universe does not mean it was created ex nihilo.It's not twisting, it's trying to understand your viewpoint. If the present 14 billion year universe didn't exist 14 billion years ago, it was created somehow 14 billion years ago.
I've explained this several times now. The current universe was created (not out of nothing) by the cyclical nature of the universe.A big bang creation, according to some...not sure if you agree or not. Something caused the big bang, I'm trying to determine what it was, in your opinion.
Fine, how about we stop this congenial, but pointless, discussion about the Cyclic Model?
Yeah, when you creatively interpret it as you do, it is not really in disagreement, like fruit trees really being older than animals and then disappearing from the fossil record for hundreds of millions of years, and then re-appearing later, right?
How about the earth being created before the sun? Is that also in agreement with science? How about "night" and "day" being created before the sun? Is that also in agreement with science? How about plants being created before the sun? Is that also in agreement with science?
You do know that life could have began many times prior to what we have in the fossil record now, right? I'm not saying that is true but it could have been possible. Regardless, I have stated this is a problem with my position but it is interesting that all plants throughout time began at one time in history.
I am finding I might be wrong about that.
Yeah, when you creatively interpret it as you do, it is not really in disagreement, like fruit trees really being older than animals and then disappearing from the fossil record for hundreds of millions of years, and then re-appearing later, right?
How about the earth being created before the sun? Is that also in agreement with science? How about "night" and "day" being created before the sun? Is that also in agreement with science? How about plants being created before the sun? Is that also in agreement with science?
Yes, but the creation of the current universe does not mean it was created ex nihilo.
I've explained this several times now. The current universe was created (not out of nothing) by the cyclical nature of the universe.
Something causing the Big Bang does not mean the Big Bang came out of nothing.
You do know that life could have began many times prior to what we have in the fossil record now, right? I'm not saying that is true but it could have been possible.
You have such a limited understanding of creation it's not a surprise you reject scripture. Let me say this as gently as I can, but you're totally ignorant of what you're trying to discuss.
Non-Sequitur much?
Can't speak for CV, but let me say this as gently as I can, I reject creationism because I understand scripture.
If you understand Scripture, you understand that it takes faith, not evidence, to accept creationism.Can't speak for CV, but let me say this as gently as I can, I reject creationism because I understand scripture.
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?