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.
Creationists just give a witness for the Creator. If it were not for God there would not be a creation. Science would not only have NOTHING to research there would be no scientists if God had not created them.what contributions has Creationism made?
And were it not for FSM to create all the Gods then you would not have creationism!Creationists just give a witness for the Creator. If it were not for God there would not be a creation. Science would not only have NOTHING to research there would be no scientists if God had not created them.
That's not what he's asking.Creationists just give a witness for the Creator. If it were not for God there would not be a creation. Science would not only have NOTHING to research there would be no scientists if God had not created them.
Creationists just give a witness for the Creator. If it were not for God there would not be a creation. Science would not only have NOTHING to research there would be no scientists if God had not created them.
Health, spiritual application,
historical analysis and others which need not be mentioned.
The science of Archeology and the science of geology just to start. LOTS of science has been discovered because people are out looking for evidence for the Bible. Even evolution came out of creationism. Many of the people here on this forum are seeking and searching for alternate explanations to creationism.That's not what he's asking.
What has the belief in, or study of, Creationism ever achieved?
No, Evolution was not born out of creationism but rather by the evidence that creationists and other people who believed in God were seeing. Many creationists started out to prove Noah's flood and creation when they came to the conclusion that both were not possible if the Bible were to be interpreted literally.The science of Archeology and the science of geology just to start. LOTS of science has been discovered because people are out looking for evidence for the Bible. Even evolution came out of creationism. Many of the people here on this forum are seeking and searching for alternate explanations to creationism.
In other words because skeptics say Creationism is not true, so a lot of science was developed to prove them wrong. The only problem is they are not willing to admit they are wrong no matter how overwhelming the evidence. Even though the 1.5% do not seem to get it. The other 98+% are convinced by the evidence that shows the Bible is true and God is real. Actually in some countries 100% of the people believe in God and in the Bible. So the scientific evidence must be overwhelming for everyone to be convinced.
So in the debate between Creationism and Skepticism the Skeptics are clearly not producing any evidence to back up their wild claims. People who come here to this board are in general more convinced by Creationism.
The door swings both ways. A LOT of science has been discovered because of Creationism. EITHER people trying to prove Creationism is true, or people trying to prove that Creationism is NOT true. Either way even the skeptics can not belittle the vast contribution Creationism has made to science.Many creationists started out to prove Noah's flood and creation when they came to the conclusion that both were not possible if the Bible were to be interpreted literally.
The door swings both ways. A LOT of science has been discovered because of Creationism. EITHER people trying to prove Creationism is true, or people trying to prove that Creationism is NOT true. Either way even the skeptics can not belittle the vast contribution Creationism has made to science.
The door swings both ways. A LOT of science has been discovered because of Creationism. EITHER people trying to prove Creationism is true, or people trying to prove that Creationism is NOT true. Either way even the skeptics can not belittle the vast contribution Creationism has made to science.
Also Creationism has been a wonderful tool for getting people interested in the study of science. People want to study science to see if Creationism is true or to discover if it is not true. So again the contribution has been significant. It is kind of silly & short sighted to suggest that the Bible and Creationism HAS NOT made a signification contribution.
For 3500 years the Bible continues to be at the top of the best seller and most read book in all the world. No one can ever say they know all there is to know about the Bible. You can spend your whole life to study and learn the Bible and you would still only be starting.
This is a bit slippery. Granted, creationism was the accepted scientific theory from 1500 - 1831. However, it turned out creationism was false. Since it is a falsified theory, I wonder how much we can say it "contributed to science". Would you say that geocentrism "contributed" as much?The door swings both ways. A LOT of science has been discovered because of Creationism. EITHER people trying to prove Creationism is true, or people trying to prove that Creationism is NOT true. Either way even the skeptics can not belittle the vast contribution Creationism has made to science.
Here the "contribution" happens only because some people mistakenly think creationism is still a valid theory. That's not a good recommendation.Also Creationism has been a wonderful tool for getting people interested in the study of science. People want to study science to see if Creationism is true or to discover if it is not true. So again the contribution has been significant.
True but dangerous. The idea is to know about God. If you spend all that time focussed on the Bible, you tend to miss God.For 3500 years the Bible continues to be at the top of the best seller and most read book in all the world. No one can ever say they know all there is to know about the Bible. You can spend your whole life to study and learn the Bible and you would still only be starting.
Now I'm curious about this. Who are these creationists who have ended up making scientific discoveries?
Actually, they don't. Creationists -- particularly modern creationists -- drive people away from the Creator. Why? Because they end up denying that God actually created and end up worshipping the Bible.Creationists just give a witness for the Creator.
That's a belief. It's one that I share, but the logic actually fails. There could be a "creation" without God as creator.If it were not for God there would not be a creation.
I don't think you can say that God created individual scientists, anymore than you can say God creates individual ministers. If there were no creation, there would indeed be no scientists. But then, there wouldn't be anyone else, either. So who would care?Science would not only have NOTHING to research there would be no scientists if God had not created them.
In other words because skeptics say Creationism is not true, so a lot of science was developed to prove them wrong. The only problem is they are not willing to admit they are wrong no matter how overwhelming the evidence. Even though the 1.5% do not seem to get it. The other 98+% are convinced by the evidence that shows the Bible is true and God is real. Actually in some countries 100% of the people believe in God and in the Bible. So the scientific evidence must be overwhelming for everyone to be convinced.
So in the debate between Creationism and Skepticism the Skeptics are clearly not producing any evidence to back up their wild claims. People who come here to this board are in general more convinced by Creationism.
Looks like this refers to the time of wrath of God.We still accept YEC and OEC as true on their own level they explain what they explain. I think OEC is the day age theory. The fruit-bearing plants were not here when the earth was covered with ice.
For the GAP Gen 1:2 begins 12,982 years ago at the end of the ice age when the earth was in a state of ruin. Everything needed restored. God is in the restoration business and He rebuilds with a remnant from the past age. We will see this again soon in your life time. The earth will be destroyed with fire. Yet a remnant will remain to rebuild the earth and to go on for another 1000 years.
The GAP takes place between Gen 1:1 & Gen 1:2. Starting in Vs 2 we see that the earth is in a state of ruin: "the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep."
Now for a explaination of "without form and void" lets look at Jeremiah 4, where we see that the earth is "formless and empty". In the Hebrew the words are the same: tohuw & bohuw.
23I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.
24I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
25I looked, and there were no people;
every bird in the sky had flown away.
26I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger.
27This is what the Lord says:
“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely.
28Therefore the earth will mourn
and the heavens above grow dark,
because I have spoken and will not relent,
I have decided and will not turn back.”
they are pretty mythical, thats true
That was a quote from a Talk Origins article: "by 1815 the broad outlines of the geologic column from Paleozoic times onward had been worked out by people who were mostly creationist geologists. The relative order of the strata was first determined by the principles of stratification. (The principle of superposition was recognized as early as 1669 by Steno.) Reverend Benjamin Richardson and Reverend Joseph Townsend were a couple of early geologists involved in this work. By 1830 Lyell's famous textbook, Principles of Geology, came out. The captain of the H.M.S. Beagle, a very strong Bible believer, made it a point to have a copy of Lyell's book for the ship's library. Obviously, even Lyell was not pushing evolution at the time. Such was the age of the great creationist geologists!" How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments: Geologic ColumnNow I'm curious about this. Who are these creationists who have ended up making scientific discoveries?
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?