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.
Done and done.Can my posts 72 and 73 get some love around here?
You accept, then, that God brought death, not sin. Thanks for changing your mind so readily.
I read back through the exchange and my perception is that @Bungle_Bear is not putting words in your mouth, but is asserting the consequences of the words you have put in your post.No ... God gave choice ..... to sin or not to sin .... all choose either life or death. God told Adam & Eve IF they ate of the tree they would surely die .... THEY made the choice .... not God.
And ... please refrain from putting words into my mouth ... in an attempt to justify YOUR thinking ... thank you
It would also seem that, if asked if God is all-knowing you would answer emphatically "YES!"No ... God gave choice ..... to sin or not to sin .... all choose either life or death. God told Adam & Eve IF they ate of the tree they would surely die .... THEY made the choice .... not God.
And ... please refrain from putting words into my mouth ... in an attempt to justify YOUR thinking ... thank you
And what if someone else would have eaten it later on? did you think of that?The only possible answer is that God didn't want them in the garden anymore.
And what if someone else would have eaten it later on? did you think of that?
Who? There were only TWO flipping people in the entire world. And God is all-knowing and omnipotent. You're saying he can't stop someone from walking up to his magic tree??? Someone who doesn't exist???And what if someone else would have eaten it later on? did you think of that?
And if circles were squares then triangles would be blue.If Adam and Eve would not have eaten .... there would not be any sin in the world. God originally gave complete dominion over the earth to Adam ... when he disobeyed God and ate he forfeited that dominion to satan and so now we got what we got until Jesus returns.
What if? If's don't matter .... what IS does.
Can my posts 72 and 73 get some love around here?
Creationists: How does creation explain the existence of parasites?
Ya ... but when someone makes a point (however ludicrous), then addresses his own point with, "the only possible answer is ...", it shows an inability (or unwillingness) to think things through.What if? If's don't matter .... what IS does.
If Adam and Eve would not have eaten .... there would not be any sin in the world. God originally gave complete dominion over the earth to Adam ... when he disobeyed God and ate he forfeited that dominion to satan and so now we got what we got until Jesus returns.
Science ... in sticking its nose into creationism, deserves what it gets: flummoxed.How and why things were made the way they were made is something creationism cannot explain.
Something has to give tho.Sometimes I also think about, if I were God what would I create? Would I make something that exists in a very specific way, perhaps mankind could be perfect, all identical genes, billions of twins. Though without variation these people might risk death in am ever changing world. The only way to remove pain and suffering would be to create us all as Gods ourselves. But I'm not sure that there really could be multiple God's, all infinitely existing at the same time.
Sometimes I consider that the world has to be this way. A world without pain would be a world without freedom, without individual minds. If we consider a scenario where a child is starving and someone makes a choice to feed that child, it would be a beautiful thing. But could a world exist where no one ever was hungry? Maybe this world would have infinite food, on a planet of an infinite size?
For a world to exist without pain, the world couldn't exist at all. So what would creation look like, if there were no suffering?
Often times our suffering comes from failed expectations. I expect a slice of pizza to have a certain taste, I bite it and it's not that good. I then suffer.
In a world without suffering, do I no longer taste? Does pizza taste infinitely good? How could I bake an infinitely good pizza? I wouldn't bake it at all, there would be no cooking at all. Then I would simply suffer because I could no longer enjoy cooking or baking because the pizza was already perfect right out of the freezer.
To truly remove suffering, I'm not sure that creation could even exist. And therefore perhaps suffering must exist by default.
Science ... in sticking its nose into creationism, deserves what it gets: flummoxed.
It's not good enough that God gives us what He did, when He did it, where He did it, how He did it, why He did it, what order He did it in, how long it took Him to do it, why it took Him that long, and who the eyewitnesses were.
No, that's not good enough.
Yet science will continually drag creationism out of history and into their laboratories, then complain they can't find anything or get any answers.
Science needs to know when it's outclassed; and when to quit.
But it won't -- so I say science can take a hike.
I'd thought about responding to post #72, but it seemed like it was already addressed through earlier responses in the thread which boil down to, God works in mysterious ways.
And that really is the limit of creationism when it comes to trying to explain anything about creation. Things are the way they are because that's how things were made.
How and why things were made the way they were made is something creationism cannot explain.
I have had the impossible burger once at Burger King. It was not very different from a regular Whopper and the price, at least then, was the same. I do not think that carbon offsets will be necessary. It is already competitive and it as production improves the price could easily be cheaper than beef.Ouch, don't eat beef already, but I am a ways from enjoying a vegetarian diet. Working on it. Carbon offsets to make Impossible cost effective? LOL
I'm going to disagree, because of your next sentence.This isn't a case of science needing to take a hike.
I agree with you.pitabread said:It's the issue of creationists needing to understand that their theological beliefs don't actually have the explanatory power they pretend they have.
Give me a big steak and burn that sucker to a crisp!I have had the impossible burger once at Burger King.
But why, pray tell, are they put in a situation where they have to explain anything?
If science would learn how inefficient and powerless it is to take on anything in the Bible
Creationists need to back off
and learn to tell science to take a hike
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?