Different state past

[Elendur]

Yes I am! I am using it...against you! Unless you can by your own standards support the foundational belief which is the present state is the key to the past, then your whole case is destroyed and worthless.

Nope.

We can
1. Observe the present and continue to observe over the future.
2. Discern patterns from those observations.
3. Predict future events from those patterns.

We use the assumptions that we can use these patterns to tell what has happened in the past.

Every observable evidence lines up with each other, supporting this assumption.

Except your interpretation of the bible.

That is: We have plenty evidence for this assumption and one against.

But you choose to ignore that. I don't understand why.

 

[AV1611VET]

There's the problem! You've decided that God must be right. You don't start with your conclusion and then try to fit the facts to it, because it just puts you right into the middle of a big mess.

I love that cartoon.

Notice on the left, how bones on a table are considered 'facts'?

And on the right side, that must be one doosey of a large-print book on Genesis to be that thick; yet the professor is wearing glasses. And the ribbon marker protruding from -- get this -- the top of the book is indicative of a family Bible.

If I was the girl in the left panel, I would reply, 'I conclude you´re a messy housekeeper;' and if I was the student in the right panel, I would reply, 'Show me the paradigm that you take by faith, and I´ll try and assemble a logarithm to satisfy it.'

 

[Tiberius]

Oh, I'm sorry, AV. I forgot how you conclusively convinced us that bones of an animal can't tell us anything. How they aren't sources of information.

As usualy, your myopia blinds you to the way things are actually going on.

 

[sandwiches]

Within the context of a past nature according to the bible, it is simpler to assume difference than special massive daily intervention. Obviously.

It's easier to realize the obvious: The Bible isn't accurate or true when describing those past events.

 

[dad]

There's the problem! You've decided that God must be right.

If there is a God He would have to be right, no?

You don't start with your conclusion and then try to fit the facts to it, because it just puts you right into the middle of a big mess.

No. It gets you out of one.

 

[dad]

Explain why it is the simplest explanation to assume that hundreds of laws of nature we can observe to appear to operate exactly the same as today as millions of years ago, all have changed in such a specific way that there is no method we can use to prove it, instead of just that an arrogant man on the internet has got his biblical interpretation wrong.

How could they have been different in a way you would know?

 

[dad]

Oh, I'm sorry, AV. I forgot how you conclusively convinced us that bones of an animal can't tell us anything. How they aren't sources of information..

What do you do, toss them on the ground and see how they land?

 

[dad]

It's easier to realize the obvious: The Bible isn't accurate or true when describing those past events.

How would you know? God sure seems accurate to me.

 

[AV1611VET]

What do you do, toss them on the ground and see how they land?

ZING!

That was powerful!

 

[Mr Strawberry]

ZING!

That was powerful!

"he jests at scars that never felt a wound"

 

[AV1611VET]

"he jests at scars that never felt a wound"

Adam & Eve didn't have navels, since navels are scars -- is that what you're saying?

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Adam & Eve didn't have navels, since navels are scars -- is that what you're saying?

Lol, interpretation of literature isn't your strong point.

 

[Tiberius]

If there is a God He would have to be right, no?

Yes. IF there is a God, and IF the Bible is correct, and IF your interpretation is correct. It seems to me that you;ve struck out on all three.

No. It gets you out of one.

Your tremendous misuse of logic never ceases to amaze me.

What do you do, toss them on the ground and see how they land?

Oh, stung to the heart by the incredible wit of dad! How shall I ever recover?

Adam & Eve didn't have navels, since navels are scars -- is that what you're saying?

Ah, your hypocritical stance on scars again. How a belly button indicates a past that didn't occur, and thus they don't exist on A&E, and yet you don't have a problem with meteorite craters that do the same thing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ah, your hypocritical stance on scars again. How a belly button indicates a past that didn't occur, and thus they don't exist on A&E, and yet you don't have a problem with meteorite craters that do the same thing.

God created the earth with meteor craters, did He?

 

[rambot]

No, by any reading possible there are more details in chapter 2. Ask someone that knows about these things.

More detail? The creation account from Chpt 1 is 27 verses where the "Creating" is being discussed.
Chapter 2 is verses 5-9.
I don't think you're lying, but I do think your method of pronouncing things demonstrably false, is more than a bit misguided.

That's what you think. You are blathering on about nothing, offering nothing and leading nowhere fast.

If I was ACTUALLY blathering on about nothing, you wouldn't be replying to my "nothing" in an "on topic fashion". Perhaps this is how you say you don't want to discuss this subject with me anymore?

And dad, how can anyone "offer you anything"? You think every one of us to be so far beneath you, we are barely worth your time. You pay no attention to anyone else's ideas; not because the ideas are subpar but because you have some baseless sense of smugness in these discussions. You don't don't appear to evaluate ideas based on merit. You seem to evaluate them SOLELY based on whether you already agree with them.

 

[Jazer]

Adam & Eve didn't have navels, since navels are scars -- is that what you're saying?

So when God removed Adams Rib He did not leave a scar? Actually the DNA is in the bone marrow that science can remove with a long hyprodermic needle.

 

[Jazer]

God created the earth with meteor craters, did He?

That is one theory. That a meteor brought a seed to the earth that grew when it got here. Not widely accepted by science but people like Fred Hoyle supported this belief to some degree.

 

[Jazer]

God sure seems accurate to me.

I have a friend that works on a 3 million dollar machine that is suppose to be accurate to a billioneth. How much more accurate do we need?

 

[pgp_protector]

It's easier to realize the obvious: The Bible isn't accurate or true when describing those past events.

How would you know? God sure seems accurate to me.

I've always found it strange that some people so easily replace the Bible with God.

 

[pgp_protector]

I have a friend that works on a 3 million dollar machine that is suppose to be accurate to a billioneth. How much more accurate do we need?

Billionth of What ?
Billionth of an Micron or a Billionth of a light year?