Do creationists critically examine their own ideas (re: creationism)?

[dad]

DNA from ancient humans, Neanderthals and Denisova are consistent with the relatedness via evolution. They are completely in opposition to humans being descended from Noah and four women.

False. Unless Noah and company HAD DNA as we know it, there is actually no connection. The ancient remains you cited are POST flood!

When you include miracles it is completely possible for an omnipotent God to construct created kinds who just happen to be constructed exactly as if they are from a branching tree structure of relatedness. But without the evidence for the existence such a deceptive deity in the world there isn't any reason to include it as a possibility.

Include miracles when talking about creation!? You kidding? You simply exclude God and His power.

A manipulative cosmic liar who wants the world to look evolved isn't in evidence, so I see no reason to assume it's real.

I look at rocks and see isotope patterns that represent a changing old nature, not like you do and assume all the patterns got there in the present nature. Nothing looks old. Your religion makes it look old! I look at the fossil record and see animal remains from a former nature that allowed those particular animals to fossilize, while not allowing most life on earth to do so. It does not look old. Your religion makes everything seem old.

The ability for the entire universe to "change states" while leaving false evidence for the modern state developing in a consistent manner from the start of the universe isn't in evidence, so I see no reason to assume it's real.

We do not know enough about the universe to claim it all changed in nature. But earth must have if the ancient histories and Scripture are correct.

If you can actually present evidence for these extraordinary claims, please feel free to do so. Then we can discuss possibilities and reality.

Your claims that all remains the same are extraordinary. It cannot be supported, only believed.

 

[Kylie]

Are you not reading what he is saying...he said the bible in conjunction with what he sees in the world around him and within himself...objective...subjective...intellectual...emotional...imaginative...existential...experiential...in other words, the whole person (not just intellect), because it's not what you encounter when you encounter truth...it is Who...person to person...a realm that science cannot enter...

I have spent a lot of time debating with dad, and I know what his position is. He has never been able to produce anything from the real world to support his claims.

 

[Kylie]

Same reason you do not give evidence in this thread to support your religion.

Don't blame this on me. I've tried to show you the evidence for my position. I spent ages trying to explain how radioactive decay shows that the laws of nature were the same in the past as they are today. You bent over backwards to explain it away, which showed me that you were more interested in holding onto your beliefs than you were with honest investigation. That's why I don't bother trying to explain it to you any more, because I know you won't listen.

On the other hand, you've never given any support for your position. All you've done is try to explain away stuff you don't like. When I've REALLY pushed you to provide evidence for your position, the best I've gotten is something like, "The evidence that I'm right is that you can't prove I'm wrong."

 

[pitabread]

He has never been able to produce anything from the real world to support his claims.

He doesn't seem to believe in the real world.

 

[Tone]

The problems come when you vaguely hand wave together observations with emotional reactions to them.

If something can't be critically analysed or isolated then it might still be true, but there isn't a rational reason for believing it.

What problems...what can't be critically analyzed...what are you aiming for with your fragmentation...are you saying nothing is rational unless you can scientize (cut) it?

 

[Tone]

He doesn't seem to believe in the real world.

Convention is not the real world...

 

[Tone]

I have spent a lot of time debating with dad, and I know what his position is. He has never been able to produce anything from the real world to support his claims.

I proved it in my life.

Isn't this enough for you...do you realize what you are saying when you say he can't "produce anything from the real world"? You are saying that he is a nothing...and yet how much time have you spent debating him...why?

 

[dad]

Don't blame this on me. I've tried to show you the evidence for my position. I spent ages trying to explain how radioactive decay shows that the laws of nature were the same in the past as they are today. You bent over backwards to explain it away, which showed me that you were more interested in holding onto your beliefs than you were with honest investigation. That's why I don't bother trying to explain it to you any more, because I know you won't listen.

On the other hand, you've never given any support for your position. All you've done is try to explain away stuff you don't like. When I've REALLY pushed you to provide evidence for your position, the best I've gotten is something like, "The evidence that I'm right is that you can't prove I'm wrong."

Don't believe you, you offered religion, and fled when scrutiny came in a religious huff.

 

[Tone]

.are you saying nothing is rational unless you can scientize (cut) it?

In the garden of Eden...the serpent convinced Eve of this same fallacious thought...the problem is...is that when you try to scientize His word...you are guilty of attempting to subject the unsubjectable to your own creaturely imagination and will. And since, He is a good Creator and has our utmost well being in mind; any deviation is the way of death.

 

[SelfSim]

Isn't this enough for you...do you realize what you are saying when you say he can't "produce anything from the real world"? You are saying that he is a nothing...and yet how much time have you spent debating him...why?

I also have spent some time attempting to converse with him.
I have no interest in attempting to dissuade him from his blind faith .. that's his to choose .. however, his repeated wild assertions about how he thinks science works are nothing more than bald-faced lies and require constant correction.

I don't come to his place of work and tell him how to sweep up, so he should show the same (Christian) respect!

 

[dad]

In the garden of Eden...the serpent convinced Eve of this same fallacious thought...the problem is...is that when you try to scientize His word...you are guilty of attempting to subject the unsubjectable to your own creaturely imagination and will. And since, He is a good Creator and has our utmost well being in mind; any deviation is the way of death.

Adam and Eve were not created by anyone's 'creaturely imagination' but were created by God and the event recorded in the bible.

 

[Kylie]

Isn't this enough for you...do you realize what you are saying when you say he can't "produce anything from the real world"? You are saying that he is a nothing...and yet how much time have you spent debating him...why?

No, I'm saying that he is not able to support the claims he makes.

It's quite clear. I don't know why you seem to think the statement, "You are unable to support the claims you make" means that the person is nothing.

 

[Kylie]

Don't believe you, you offered religion, and fled when scrutiny came in a religious huff.

You're scrutiny was nothing more than a lack of scientific understanding and repeated claims of "Fraid not!"

 

[dad]

You're scrutiny was nothing more than a lack of scientific understanding and repeated claims of "Fraid not!"

Guess we'll never know since for the last year or whatever all we get is whining and insults and vague claims of grandeur from you.

 

[Tone]

Adam and Eve were not created by anyone's 'creaturely imagination' but were created by God and the event recorded in the bible.

I agree. What I was getting at was the idea that the serpent scientized (analyzed; cut) what the Creator said (His word); undermining His benevolence. What this did create, was a false god...an irrational god.

 

[Tone]

I don't know why you seem to think the statement, "You are unable to support the claims you make" means that the person is nothing.

Because, as I quoted, he supports his claims with his personal testimony, which you completely disregard.

 

[dad]

I agree. What I was getting at was the idea that the serpent scientized (analyzed; cut) what the Creator said (His word); undermining His benevolence. What this did create, was a false god...an irrational god.

Sorry, misread things

 

[Kylie]

Guess we'll never know since for the last year or whatever all we get is whining and insults and vague claims of grandeur from you.

You're speaking of yourself, not me. As I've said, the reason I don't bother providing the evidence to you is because I don't see why I should spend the time to craft a well reasoned reply to your posts when you're just going to ignore it.

 

[trophy33]

Being inspired does not mean every word is from a know it all goody two shoes. It means that God spoke through sinners. When Paul expressed his own opinion he mentioned it was his opinion, not necessarily from God directly, as as an example. Most of the time though he was teaching others what he was taught himself from God! The genealogies were important, so God inspired them to be included, it connects Adam, the first man to the modern age. Not sure how evos would deal with these records!? 'Gee, Adam was just the first human like ape on the evo tree...blah blah'

Jesus made it clear that when He ascended to heaven He would send His Spirit to some people to help them get His words recorded right! His words are as much Scripture as anything He inspired before at least! The apostles and folks He inspired to teach people are also based on His words and inspiration.

It means words from God. Of course they instruct.

Using the word (sword) of God properly does not mean using it as a book marker in a Darwin book!


Every jot and tittle.


Worshiping God includes placing His word above demon science.
The bible tells us how babies are formed by God in the womb, science does not cover that, as science only deals with the physical formation. The bible tells us what eternal bodies will be like, science stops at the grave! The bible shows how spiritual bodies can remain unscathed by smoke and fire and death. Science has no clue. The bible tells us this body is a temporary dwelling, like a tent, science sees no more than this body and mind. Etc. Science is like an infant that has never been out of the house yet compared to the wisdom of God.
The bible says how God created the first couple and listed the genealogies from them to the modern time. Believing this is not adding, while not believing this to accommodate demon science is taking away from what is said, as well as adding lies to it!

Stop getting bogged down thinking God's word is limited to your conception of what the men who wrote it were probably like! God wrote it, and piped it through the men. God knows all about the quantum mechanics. Science is just learning about them and how to tweak them and use them. God knew all about this and everything else science will never know long before creation week!

God uses mere humans. He is that big!

He that comes to God must believe that He is! And that He is true. Coming to Him is coming to the One who made it all, just as He said.

I recommend you to learn more about the Bible, how it came to be, different manuscripts, canons, traditions. After that, you will think in a more complex way, not just black&white way like "we have every word right". We have enough, thanks to God's provision. But not every word.

 

[Kylie]

Because, as I quoted, he supports his claims with his personal testimony, which you completely disregard.

And personal testimony is worthless as evidence for how the real world works.