Ex-Con Hovind released from the pokey.

[Willtor]

False history = false history.

Correct it and move on.

It's not like they haven't been wrong before.

Yeah, but in this case, you're saying that all the evidence is in their favor.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you really think the government conspired to put Kent Hovind away just because he spoke out against evolution?

I believe the Devil wanted Mr. Hovind put away, and used whatever means he could to do it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you really think the government conspired to put Kent Hovind away just because he spoke out against evolution?

I believe the Devil wanted Mr. Hovind put away, and used whatever means he could to do it.

 

[Willtor]

I believe the Devil wanted Mr. Hovind put away, and used whatever means he could to do it.

You don't even agree with Hovind. Why would the Devil be trying to stop someone who's wrong, anyway? And why not other people who are more successful at selling wrongness like him?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would the Devil be trying to stop someone who's wrong, anyway?

Because Mr. Hovind is a thorn in evolution's side.

And evolution is going to reach its pinnacle during the Tribulation period, when the Antichrist is going to put on a demonstration of abiogenesis, causing scientists to take the Mark.

Someone could be preaching Last Thursdayism, and the Devil would still want him out of the way.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Because Mr. Hovind is a thorn in evolution's side.

And evolution is going to reach its pinnacle during the Tribulation period, when the Antichrist is going to put on a demonstration of abiogenesis, causing scientists to take the Mark.

Someone could be preaching Last Thursdayism, and the Devil would still want him out of the way.

We do have a group out there now in the Tigris Euphrates valley that has been known to behead people.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...a-iraq-isis-rogue-state-along-two-rivers.html

Revelation 20:4

Then I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand; and they came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...a-iraq-isis-rogue-state-along-two-rivers.html

 

[Willtor]

Because Mr. Hovind is a thorn in evolution's side.

And evolution is going to reach its pinnacle during the Tribulation period, when the Antichrist is going to put on a demonstration of abiogenesis, causing scientists to take the Mark.

Someone could be preaching Last Thursdayism, and the Devil would still want him out of the way.

Why is evolution worse than Last Thursdayism? Especially if the false history includes evolution?

 

[Smidlee]

Yeah, but in this case, you're saying that all the evidence is in their favor.

Of course not all evidence. Scientist assumes the universe revolves around man's intellect which itself is part of the universe. Because of this assumption it can mislead them to believe something about the universe that is not true.

Take for example the movie "Frozen". This movie and it's universe was created by the "word of man" ... literally. Man spoke to a computer through a keyboard and man spoke through a mic for the characters. Imagine man had the ability to bring those character to life and had the ability to study their universe .. thus becoming scientist. These scientist would assume the "Frozen" universe created itself and them not realizing that their universe was actually governed by a unseen "code" in a super computer created by man which is outside of their universe. They would no doubt realize their universe seemed be to "fine tuned" for life but try to explain this away by multi-universes (there are many other universe / movies that exist.) and they just happen to be lucky enough to be in a universe that support them.

Now Mans' universes is no where on the same level as God's created universes so the universe that man lives on is superior than man-made universe... thus less real. All I'm doing it taking what I know is true and realizing God could do even more in His universe than man can do in his. If a person assumes the universe created itself then the "evidence" would cause that person to come up with the wrong conclusions .

Bascially we end up with "revelation" ( The movie itself doesn't tell you how it was created but by revelation some DVD has clips of "How the movie was made") or "speculation" when it comes to origins.

Hebrews 11:3 " Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

 

[Willtor]

Of course not all evidence. Scientist assumes the universe revolves around man's intellect which itself is part of the universe. Because of this assumption it can mislead them to believe something about the universe that is not true.

Take for example the movie "Frozen". This movie and it's universe was created by the "word of man" ... literally. Man spoke to a computer through a keyboard and man spoke through a mic for the characters. Imagine man had the ability to bring those character to life and had the ability to study their universe .. thus becoming scientist. These scientist would assume the "Frozen" universe created itself and them not realizing that their universe was actually governed by a unseen "code" in a super computer created by man which is outside of their universe. They would no doubt realize their universe seemed be to "fine tuned" for life but try to explain this away by multi-universes (there are many other universe / movies that exist.) and they just happen to be lucky enough to be in a universe that support them.

Now Mans' universes is no where on the same level as God's created universes so the universe that man lives on is superior than man-made universe... thus less real. All I'm doing it taking what I know is true and realizing God could do even more in His universe than man can do in his. If a person assumes the universe created itself then the "evidence" would cause that person to come up with the wrong conclusions .

Bascially we end up with "revelation" ( The movie itself doesn't tell you how it was created but by revelation some DVD has clips of "How the movie was made") or "speculation" when it comes to origins.

Hebrews 11:3 " Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

My response was to AV1611VET, who believes that the world has a false history.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why is evolution worse than Last Thursdayism? Especially if the false history includes evolution?

I didn't say that.

I said the Antichrist is going to raise the philosophy of evolution to its highest peak during the Tribulation period.

He will make evolution so easy to grasp and understand (even putting on a demonstration of abiogenesis), that scientists will line up to take the Mark.

 

[AV1611VET]

My response was to AV1611VET, who believes that the world has a false history.

Only because historians & scientists have given it one.

 

[RickG]

Only because historians & scientists have given it one.

I didn't know you were a historian/scientist?

 

[AV1611VET]

I didn't know you were a historian/scientist?

I'm not.

But I can read.

 

[RickG]

I'm not.

But I can read.

You do realize that when you say historian, that includes the bible, don't you?

 

[AV1611VET]

You do realize that when you say historian, that includes the bible, don't you?

Yes, the Bible is the True Historian.

Anything otherwise is just fiction.

 

[RickG]

Yes, the Bible is the True Historian.

Anything otherwise is just fiction.

Thanks for providing an excellent example of "confirmation bias".

 

[AV1611VET]

Thanks for providing an excellent example of "confirmation bias".

So let's sum this conversation up, shall we?

Someone said I said the earth has a false history.

I concur because I believe historians & scientists have given it a history that contradicts the Bible.

And by doing so, I'm "providing an excellent example of confirmation bias."

Catch-22, isn't it?

 

[Smidlee]

So let's sum this conversation up, shall we?

Someone said I said the earth has a false history.

I concur because I believe historians & scientists have given it a history that contradicts the Bible.

And by doing so, I'm "providing an excellent example of confirmation bias."

Catch-22, isn't it?

Not only contradicts the Bible when you have 500 million year old rock (according to the evolutionist assumptions) 1000 feet high setting on top of 100 million year old rock there is something wrong with man's interpretation of history.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not only contradicts the Bible when you have 500 million year old rock (according to the evolutionist assumptions) 1000 feet high setting on top of 100 million year old rock there is something wrong with man's interpretation of history.

Be careful now.

You might be accused of saying the earth has a false history.

 

[RickG]

So let's sum this conversation up, shall we?

Someone said I said the earth has a false history.

I concur because I believe historians & scientists have given it a history that contradicts the Bible.

And by doing so, I'm "providing an excellent example of confirmation bias."

Catch-22, isn't it?

No, it just means you are not "all-inclusive" of data when it comes to evaluating that data. You include only that that supports your position and deliberately ignore all data that does not support your position.