God's beautiful creation

[BCP1928]

Oh, found it! OK, the real answer to the real question - as for theorists claiming fact. I could go and pull an example up, but may I paraphrase a few typical ones I've encountered here and over the years?

The poster states something like, "This fossil is 200,000 years old". You reply, "How'd you date it?". They reply, "X method". You say, "but that only measures up to 50,000 years." They say, "Yeah well, we extrapolated from there. Very precise." You say, "But, that isn't measurable, thus demonstrable." They say, "Ah but that's science, we go with it till we improve upon the process to measure." You say, "But you stated it as fact now, that's dishonest.". They say, "Trust me, I'm a scientist." And repeat it to the next guy without blinking.

Or another poster says, "Here is the skeleton of an apertyx. It is obviously smack dab in the middle of transitioning from one species to the next." "Which species?". "From bird to fish". "Isn't that backwards?" "Yeah, well...". "Where are the developing gills? The scales? The fins? The skeletal system? The bug eyes?" "Well it IS flightless. How about that?" "Kinda like an ostrich? How is this apertyx any more so in transistion?" "Well, we're projecting" "But you stated it as fact. That's dishonest." "Thats how science works. Trust us, we're scientists".

"And we're with the government. We're here to help you!".

OK, a bit comical. But no less so as some of the serious posts that pass as "scientific".

View attachment 359594

Can you not quote anybody doing it? Refer us to a reputable textbook or scientific paper? Your comic take on something you remember from a chatroom conversation won't make it.

 

[BCP1928]

I was prepared to engage you on one of your other replies, and then I saw this.

I'm done with you, BCP. I gave you another shot against my better judgement, and now I'm moving on to play with the adults in the room.

I will say before we part, btw, and for those equally interested, one can certainly receive Christ and begin a personal relationship with Him without a Bible - because His Spirit IS the Word - and that is Who one is receiving. But a genuine indwelling will create a hunger to know Him, which will inevitably lead to His written Word. And as one absorbs His Word - they will recognize that the written Word agrees with what His Spirit is telling them in prayer and in an experienced walk with Jesus.

There will come a time, inevitably and quickly, that one concludes that Scripture is absolutely 100%, bonafide, and authentically divinely inspired, inerrant, trustworthy and *essential* for the growth and guidance of the believer.

Correct. All Christians believe that and always have. That doesn't mean they agree with you about Genesis, however, which is the point at issue.

All for one reason - the Spirit says so, we hear Him, and believe Him. How do we know its the Spirit speaking? The Bible tells us how to know.

Romans 8 NIV

"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."

"Those who live according to the flesh have their minds set on what the flesh desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God."

"You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life because of righteousness."

See? This is how the Father, the Son (The Word), and the Spirit all interact and are glorified in the minds, hearts, souls and spirits of His children.

I have met a plethora of believers over the decades with the exact same experience - speaking the exact same Gospel - indwelt by the same Holy Spirit - speaking the same spiritual language. We are a remnant yet a multitude, are worldwide in almost every nation, language and tribe, and are united in the Mind of Christ. We are found within various denominations, but are not particularly bound to their doctrines, creeds or traditions.

Quite frankly, if one doesn't have His Spirit, they won't revere and proclaim His Name, and they will have no respect for His Holy Scripture. They'll give Him lip service and deny the power thereof.

That's the church I grew up in, and looking back I realized that they couldn't give a rip about anyone's eternal soul. If they did, they would have preached the full Gospel from the Holy Bible with boldness and confidence. As it was, the church had all the trappings like a white-washed tomb. It was dead as a door knob. And the world is chock full of them. You better believe I oppose the institution, but pray for the congregants. Someone obviously prayed for me.

Ok, BCP? Can you maybe print this out and pin to your refrigerator door for future reference, as long as you are obsessing over me?

So fire away, Gridley! Maybe after 5 or 6 pot shots you'll run out of venom and get bored of interjecting yourself into my conversations with others.

Have a great day and God bless! *BIG grin*

You could have just said "no" and saved a lot of bandwidth.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's kinda like Tesla rolling out a new car. "This car reaches 100 mph in 60 seconds. One day we foresee that it will reach 200 mph in 60 seconds. Ergo, it now goes 200 mph because we project we will be able to prove as much in the future, though *blush* it is only theory as of now. But hey, that's how junk science works, folks. Always improvin' but never provin'! Just take our word, we're scientists."

If you're going to make up an "example" to impugn scientists pick a plausible one. Teslas are electric cars which as a category have notoriously fast acceleration. Even without looking it up (and because it isn't a standard performance metric), my guess would be that the 0-100 mph time is more like 6 seconds. (Or you could not accuse us of deception without basis.)

 

[AV1611VET]

If you're going to make up an "example" to impugn scientists pick a plausible one.

Ya -- like Thalidomide.

 

[Aaron112]

Ya -- like Thalidomide.

Ya, and OVER a hundred other sickening drugs(but profitable for the drugmakers)

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The poster states something like, "This fossil is 200,000 years old". You reply, "How'd you date it?". They reply, "X method". You say, "but that only measures up to 50,000 years." They say, "Yeah well, we extrapolated from there. Very precise." You say, "But, that isn't measurable, thus demonstrable." They say, "Ah but that's science, we go with it till we improve upon the process to measure." You say, "But you stated it as fact now, that's dishonest.". They say, "Trust me, I'm a scientist." And repeat it to the next guy without blinking.

Yeah, no one says this at all so that's a flat out lie.

Or another poster says, "Here is the skeleton of an apertyx. It is obviously smack dab in the middle of transitioning from one species to the next." "Which species?". "From bird to fish". "Isn't that backwards?" "Yeah, well...". "Where are the developing gills? The scales? The fins? The skeletal system? The bug eyes?" "Well it IS flightless. How about that?" "Kinda like an ostrich? How is this apertyx any more so in transistion?" "Well, we're projecting" "But you stated it as fact. That's dishonest." "Thats how science works. Trust us, we're scientists".

And no-one has said this at all, since you created this from thin air (or rather pulled it from your behind), so that's a lie too.

"And we're with the government. We're here to help you!".

This is the only one I'll agree on.

 

[River Jordan]

Oh wait, was the first about macro-evolutionary theory being based on junk science maybe? If you are asking why, it's simply because I believe the speculative is held up as factual.

Do you have a specific example?

As for the 2nd question

The second question was for you to clarify your point, but it looks like you've forgotten what it was anyway, so nevermind.

 

[dlamberth]

The poster states something like, "This fossil is 200,000 years old". You reply, "How'd you date it?". They reply, "X method". You say, "but that only measures up to 50,000 years." They say, "Yeah well, we extrapolated from there. Very precise." You say, "But, that isn't measurable, thus demonstrable." They say, "Ah but that's science, we go with it till we improve upon the process to measure." You say, "But you stated it as fact now, that's dishonest.". They say, "Trust me, I'm a scientist." And repeat it to the next guy without blinking.

Anyone with any real knowledge of how science works would never say such a thing.

 

[Juvenal]

"Anti-science" is a straw man. Our opposition is towards JUNK "science" - which is the theory of macro-evolution to a T. Haven't you dogged my posts long enough to note that I always put "science" in quotation marks in regards to when the line is crossed from reality to fantasy?

The very same science that gives us paternity tests based on common genomes gives us cladograms showing the differences between organisms with common ancestors.

 

[Aldebaran]

PLEASE KEEP POSTS ON TOPIC AND NOT FOR ATTACKING OTHER MEMBERS.

UPDATE: Thread has been closed as off topic to the forum.​