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.
Very good!Vance said:So, you want a forum where only Young Earth Creationists sit around and discuss, well, Young Earth Creation concepts? Well, I suppose you could have that type of forum if you like.
But this forum is intended to flesh out the very real debate between the concepts of Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism and Theistic Evolution. Since Young Earth Creationism is the minority opinion among Christians worldwide, it seems odd that you would be surprised that many Christians argue against YEC'ism and for one of the other interpretations of Genesis.
To me, the real debate is between OEC and TE, with YEC'ism not even really in the running as a viable and believable option for Christians. But I would never argue that they be excluded from the forum just because I don't agree with them.
The same thing could happen in your suggested forum. Atheists could claim to be YECs and fill up the forum with nothing but lies hoping that you will post them someplace else and be torn apart.Dutchunter said:could say "I'm a Christian" and post their nonsense here anyway.
There is not a YEC-only forum. If you would like, you can go into the Bugs, Suggestions, and Help (I believe that's the title) forum and ask Erwin to create one. I fail to see the point such a forum would serve.Is there a Creation only forum where we can discuss God's awesome Creation
Science does not prove us right; it proves you wrong. There is a tremendous difference which I'm sure you care not about.and not have to argue with those who claim that "science" proves them right
Big talkwhen in fact it seems every day they're proven wrong
I do not understand what you are trying to say here.and can only offer- well, things change.
Do you mean there is no evidence of a Creator or no evidence of evolution? If the latter than you are incorrect. See here and hereI and others believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD. NOT a Creator who starts the evolutionary process- of which there is no evidence at all
You think that reading the Bible alone makes one qualified to state what the earth is like? If not then don't their other credentials come into question?When people on your side mock AIG and their credentials etc when their foundation is the BIBLE
If we didn't look at God's creation you, and everyone else here, would still believe the sun was in orbit around the earth.don't go telling me you're here for a discussion on God's CREATION.
There is a very large difference in the people who post. Look at the members that frequent the other forum and notice how many do not post here.I noticed you didn't deny there wasn't any difference between the two forums.
Violation of forum rule #1.Gee...could that be because you have the same beliefs as "non-believers"
Once again, big talk. If you think you have a falsification of evolution or an old earth please feel free to create a thread on that very subject. Without it I am forced to believe that you are merely blowing smoke.following the same "science" that gets disproven all the time?
Yeah, and what's with the textbooks and media shoving atomic theory and DNA down our throats too? Atomic bombs didn't destroy Hiroshima and Nagasaki, God did!Even I grew up as people still do today with textbooks and the media(of all kinds) pushing evolution down our throats
God is less awesome if humanity was created via evolution? I could not disagree with you more.They realize how awesome God really is.
I believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD as well. You are putting your interpretation of the bible in front of understanding Gods creation. When we study the creation, we see something different that what is described in the bible which leads us to understand that the creation story in the bible is a metaphor. This understanding does not say that God is not the creator, it is just a different interpretation of how God created with evidence from the actual creation.Dutchunter said:I see no such thing from the the evolutionists such as yourself. I and others believe in a CREATOR, PERIOD. NOT a Creator who starts the evolutionary process- of which there is no evidence at all. When people on your side mock AIG and their credentials etc when their foundation is the BIBLE- and are able to back up what they say- don't go telling me you're here for a discussion on God's CREATION.
I noticed you didn't deny there wasn't any difference between the two forums. Gee...could that be because you have the same beliefs as "non-believers"- following the same "science" that gets disproven all the time? Nah......
THAT is the belief I was referring to. Now go back to finding all those missing links for usfollowing the same "science" that gets disproven all the time?
I said "one believed to be ancestral to the other".Dutchunter said:That's the problem....there is no "one ancestral to the other". Show me the ones that show human "evolution". Dinosaurs. Actual evidence- not artists "rendering", not one or a small % of bones used to make up a missing link. Hard evidence.
Sure anybody can do that, but in this case, it is only done when there is physical evidence in the creation that directly contradicts and falsifies a literal reading of the texts.Dutchunter said:Then anybody can just claim everything else is just a metaphor in the Bible as well. I am putting them both together, as AIG is able to do so well. Do you read their publications? It's obvious so many don't bother to go thru all they have on their website..even I don't. Magazines etc seem to get the point across much better.
No there is not physical evidence that directly contradicts and falsifies a literal reading of the texts.notto said:Sure anybody can do that, but in this case, it is only done when there is physical evidence in the creation that directly contradicts and falsifies a literal reading of the texts.
The same thing was done to falsify geocentrism and descriptions of doors in the firmament for allowing rain to fall through and storehouses of snow in the heavens that open when it snows. Do you take these texts as literal descriptions of what causes weather?
Oh wow.... it's easier than I thought. That didn't take you very longVance said:This just shows your utter lack of understanding of how science works.
Go do some reading and come back when you can honestly say you have read both sides.
So there are doors in the firmament that let the rain in and storehouses of snow in the firmament?Dutchunter said:No there is not physical evidence that directly contradicts and falsifies a literal reading of the texts.
Why don't you ask yourself the same question? I'm not the one who seems to have a problem with my "theory".Vance said:Well, no, it does not take very long to tell you not to waste our time going back over the same discussions again and again. Why don't you read through the threads on this forum, see what arguments have been made back and forth on legitimately debated issues, and add something new to the discussion.
Otherwise, what is the point?
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?