How many creationists practise what they preach?

[Cearbhall]

I once took a calculator and did the math myself, and had about a 100-year variance with Mr. Ussher's calculations.

Your source has to be verifiable for that to matter.

 

[Hoghead1]

Are you really sure you guys are using Ussher's calculations? Last time I examined these matters, I definitely recall seeing considerable literature demonstrating that it was his followers who gave the date of 4004BC, not Ussher.

 

[Cearbhall]

You can Google as well as I can of finding creation stories in other religions and cultures. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

How can you possibly think that ancient folklore provides stronger evidence for Creationism than science has found for evolution?

 

[Hoghead1]

Ah, yes, found Ussher's dates in my old notes. Problem is, he actually gave two dates, 4004 BC and 4003 BC.

 

[PsychoSarah]

One must accept that Jesus created all things, and that the scripture, including Moses is true blue. Not to do so is unbelief.

In your opinion, but scripturally, (while inconsistent about who has to believe in order to be saved, as there is at least 1 passage that states only one person in a family has to believe for the entire family to be saved) a person only has to accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior, and believe in YHWH while worshipping no other gods in order to get into heaven. Reading the bible itself is not even a prerequisite.

 

[Jay Follett]

In your opinion, but scripturally, (while inconsistent about who has to believe in order to be saved, as there is at least 1 passage that states only one person in a family has to believe for the entire family to be saved) a person only has to accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior, and believe in YHWH while worshipping no other gods in order to get into heaven. Reading the bible itself is not even a prerequisite.

I think that only applies to American Christians, Christians from elsewhere must also do good works, being a Christian for some is not easy, in the US it's a piece of cake because all you need do is say you believe and that's it.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I think that only applies to American Christians, Christians from elsewhere must also do good works, being a Christian for some is not easy, in the US it's a piece of cake because all you need do is say you believe and that's it.

Actually, it depends on denomination. Works are primarily associated with Catholics and Mormons, near as I can tell. Also, general Christians often will behave as if works are a requirement.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What are you doing? Asking a question!

Fine, then -- I won't ask questions.

Now stop deflecting and show us your evidence... if any.

 

[dad]

Whatever floats your boat.

That would be the bible and what it says about the future. Science has only guesses.

 

[dad]

In your opinion, but scripturally, (while inconsistent about who has to believe in order to be saved, as there is at least 1 passage that states only one person in a family has to believe for the entire family to be saved) a person only has to accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior, and believe in YHWH while worshipping no other gods in order to get into heaven. Reading the bible itself is not even a prerequisite.

Yet the way we should have known Jesus was born was only by Scripture. The only way we know of about creation is Scripture. If some so called believer is ignorant or unbelieving of Scripture that talks of origins, they are in the dark in that dept. It isn't about getting saved here, that is just by believing in Jesus.

 

[dad]

I think that only applies to American Christians, Christians from elsewhere must also do good works, being a Christian for some is not easy, in the US it's a piece of cake because all you need do is say you believe and that's it.

Regardless of where we live, works never saved anyone. EVER.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Yet the way we should have known Jesus was born was only by Scripture. The only way we know of about creation is Scripture. If some so called believer is ignorant or unbelieving of Scripture that talks of origins, they are in the dark in that dept. It isn't about getting saved here, that is just by believing in Jesus.

Why do you care what people think, as long as they will get saved by their belief anyways? From your perspective, they shall learn the truth sooner or later, so why bother? Furthermore, if this is for atheists such as myself, you are not making believers out of anyone by spouting the extreme.

 

[bhsmte]

You can Google as well as I can of finding creation stories in other religions and cultures. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

I can ignore your reference to evidence then, thanks.

 

[OzSpen]

How can you possibly think that ancient folklore provides stronger evidence for Creationism than science has found for evolution?

This is a red herring. You were the one who wanted other creation stories and I referred you to Google. Why are you switching tactics now. Do your Googling and tell me the results of other societies that promote creation (and even flood) stories.

 

[OzSpen]

I can ignore your reference to evidence then, thanks.

So you don't like Googling to find your own evidence?

 

[bhsmte]

So you don't like Googling to find your own evidence?

I didn't mention evidence, you did.

Why would I need to look for evidence you mentioned??????

 

[PsychoSarah]

This is a red herring. You were the one who wanted other creation stories and I referred you to Google. Why are you switching tactics now. Do your Googling and tell me the results of other societies that promote creation (and even flood) stories.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths wikipedia lists more than two dozen besides those associated with the bible, and a few are older than the Old Testament.

Everyone, feel free to read them, if you want, but lots of flood myths exist in many cultures, even those that predate the bible.

 

[PsychoSarah]

So you don't like Googling to find your own evidence?

A lot of people on here don't like to do that, atheists in particular, because more often than not, the people we debate with don't read them, or disregard them, or both.

 

[OzSpen]

A lot of people on here don't like to do that, atheists in particular, because more often than not, the people we debate with don't read them, or disregard them, or both.

The Internet provides links to many resources. However, like all sources, whether in print, video, on the Internet or in person, they all have to be scrutinised. The gift of discernment is always needed in determining the reliability of any document.

I do read what is posted, but I don't appreciate people who do not want to do the hard yards of research, even when it comes to finding creation or flood stories in other religions and cultures.

Oz

 

[PsychoSarah]

The Internet provides links to many resources. However, like all sources, whether in print, video, on the Internet or in person, they all have to be scrutinised. The gift of discernment is always needed in determining the reliability of any document.

I absolutely agree, I am not presenting wikipedia as a source for deep knowledge in this regard, but it is a good resource for better sources when you look at its references.

I do read what is posted, but I don't appreciate people who do not want to do the hard yards of research, even when it comes to finding creation or flood stories in other religions and cultures.

Oz

That makes you in the minority. Most people on here will flat out not read sources posted, not even if they have reasonable time to do so, or the source is short.