Creationists: is there anything you can be wrong about?

[CabVet]

This is a simple question for creationists: is there anything you can be wrong about? If so, what? I mean, where do you draw the line between what you consider "God's truth" and personal Biblical interpretation?

 

[isleof]

Creationists: is there anything you can be wrong about?

Nope. And I'd rather be called a believer in God.

 

[CabVet]

Nope. And I'd rather be called a believer in God.

You didn't need to answer the question if the label "creationist" didn't fit. But since you did answer, do you honestly believe that your interpretation of creation is the one true interpretation and that you cannot be wrong about any detail of it?

 

[isleof]

God is true.
Agree or disagre.

 

[CabVet]

God is true.
Agree or disagre.

That wasn't the question. Are you trying to derail the thread still on its first page?

 

[isleof]

You didn't need to answer the question if the label "creationist" didn't fit. But since you did answer, do you honestly believe that your interpretation of creation is the one true interpretation and that you cannot be wrong about any detail of it?

God is the Creator. Who doubts the Creator?

 

[isleof]

That wasn't the question. Are you trying to derail the thread still on its first page?

If saying nope is offensive, it is noted.

 

[CabVet]

If saying nope is offensive, it is noted.

Ok.

 

[46AND2]

Lol.

 

[AV1611VET]

This is a simple question for creationists: is there anything you can be wrong about?

Yes

If so, what?

How much age God embedded into His creation.

Currently, I use the number scientists use: 13,700,000,000.

I mean, where do you draw the line between what you consider "God's truth" and personal Biblical interpretation?

At the clipboard.

 

[Delphiki]

Currently, I use the number scientists use: 13,700,000,000.

So, just like the bible, the parts of science you wish to choose to accept are completely arbitrary?

 

[AV1611VET]

So, just like the bible, the parts of science you wish to choose to accept are completely arbitrary?

No.

I've replaced my Boolean standards with a new set of heuristics now.

Here's my thread on this:

Based on over seven and a half years here, I'm now condensing my apologetics down into two simple rules of thumb:

Rule One: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the literal translation of the King James Bible to be contradicted.

If necessary, use even the punctuation therein to defend your point; but never let a point contradict the Bible -- ever.

Rule Two: Seek a logical explanation first; and if that doesn't work, then go with a theological explanation.

Scripture first, followed by basic doctrine, followed by suppositions; but don't let the logical trump the theological.

 

[AirPo]

You lost me at rule 1.

 

[Delphiki]

Yeah. I hope you won't mind, AV, when I point out any time you contradict your rule #1 going forward.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yeah. I hope you won't mind, AV, when I point out any time you contradict your rule #1 going forward.

Not at all.

 

[ExistenceUnknown]

Not at all.

You know, I got into a religious discussion the other day and I immediately thought of this forum and AV. It's good to see he's still the same old AV - Unwavering in his conviction and unshakable in his faith.

If you can be credited with only one thing AV, it's certainly consistency.

 

[AV1611VET]

You know, I got into a religious discussion the other day and I immediately thought of this forum and AV. It's good to see he's still the same old AV - Unwavering in his conviction and unshakable in his faith.

If you can be credited with only one thing AV, it's certainly consistency.

Thank you, sir!

And it's been awhile since I've seen you around.

Are you here for awhile (I hope)?

 

[ExistenceUnknown]

Thank you, sir!

And it's been awhile since I've seen you around.

Are you here for awhile (I hope)?

Debate on the subject of Creationism and Evolution fits the mold of the definition of insanity quite nicely.

But who knows, maybe I will.

 

[AV1611VET]

Debate on the subject of Creationism and Evolution fits the mold of Einsteins definition of insanity quite nicely.

But who knows, maybe I will.

 

[juvenissun]

This is a simple question for creationists: is there anything you can be wrong about? If so, what? I mean, where do you draw the line between what you consider "God's truth" and personal Biblical interpretation?

You will find it out very easily and quickly if you attended a low level Sunday School class.

Do you every know a Christian should also "learn"?