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.
Raise your hand if you read that as 'meaningless nipples'.Jet Black said:meaningless ripples
JetBlack said:meaningless ripplesrevolutio said:Raise your hand if you read that as 'meaningless nipples'.
A4C said:Aren't you glad hat we have scientists today so we can see just how magnificent God's creation is?
A Freethinker said:Guess what? You aren't going to change their minds, especially after saying something like this. You just told the Creationists what you are trying to do, putting them "on guard". If this is what you thought, it was best left unsaid.
Floodnut said:When he says "Been there, thanks," he refers to the Answers In Genesis website.
They do actually do science. They are physicists and astronomers. But degrees don't make them right. What is right is the Word of God. Men with degrees also believe in an old earth. The Question for a Christian Forum is what does the Bible say and What does Jesus teach.
A4C said:Have you ever wondered why stars are out there ( beside how they were formed)
If you have trouble for that perhaps you would like to read the report of a witness in Genesis. You will see that they were hung there by God with the intention of providing for the benefit of man a more interesting night sky than just a plain black one. Therefore for man to take advantage of God's galactic handiwork He would have had to create them as He did man - in a matured state.
I believe that the more you learn about God the more impressed you will be at the love He has for man as evident by His creation.
DJ_Ghost said:Guess what, your wrong. There are a number of ex-creationists on this site who have been swayed by the discussions here. They are not all so blind they will not see, some have just never been looking in the right direction.
Ghost
A Freethinker said:Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Wow, that is funny. You totally sidestepped my question, totally. Good job there. God didn't create a universe for us to look at, you need to get off of your high horse and realize a few things. Our galaxy is doomed to be ripped apart by Andromeda, and our entire cluster is doomed to be crushed into other clusters as we approach the Great Attractor. God put all that stuff up there for us to look at? If so, then why is all this action occuring? Following your "logic", the cosmos would be stationary.
Again, you need to realize that you're wrong. Your statement is complete nonsense.
Battie said:Prax is not bullying you nor is he playing the forum cop. He is making a (valid) observation. You do not need to be rude.
This is why he is right: The topic of this thread is not about whether the Bible is valid. It is about the age of the earth. Christians posting in this thread will say that the earth is either 4.5 billion years old or 6000 years old. Both groups will also say that the Bible is valid. The real question, then, which interpretation of the Bible is valid.
In fact, you affirmed this yourself when you claimed that the argument concerned rejecting the validity of the simple approach to intepreting the Bible. So, it's not about the validity of the Bible, it's about defending one's interpretation as the best one.
But, of course, the real, real question most relevant to this thread is, how old does scientific evidence say the earth is?
Battie said:Prax is not bullying you nor is he playing the forum cop. He is making a (valid) observation. You do not need to be rude.
This is why he is right: The topic of this thread is not about whether the Bible is valid. It is about the age of the earth. Christians posting in this thread will say that the earth is either 4.5 billion years old or 6000 years old. Both groups will also say that the Bible is valid. The real question, then, which interpretation of the Bible is valid.
In fact, you affirmed this yourself when you claimed that the argument concerned rejecting the validity of the simple approach to intepreting the Bible. So, it's not about the validity of the Bible, it's about defending one's interpretation as the best one.
But, of course, the real, real question most relevant to this thread is, how old does scientific evidence say the earth is?
Praxiteles said:The fact remains that this forum is a scientific one, and theological questions (such as those relating to the validity of the Bible) belong in the Apologetics forum. I'm sorry if that seems pedantic, but that simply is the way that CF is organised.
That question is nothing to do with the validity of the Bible itself, but with your interpretation of the text. A plain reading of scripture, if strictly adhered to, brings up absurdities. Even you must admit that you do not hold to a strict reading of scripture, but re-interpret some lines so as to avoid absurdity.
My argument has nothing to do with validity of scripture or otherwise, since to me the Bible is no more (or no less) an important document than the Iliad. It's a fascinating historical document which reflects the culture of the people from which it sprang. My argument is about the science, and when people come in here postulating patently ridiculous work-arounds to make science fit with their interpretation of the Bible, then I do not wish to let that pass.
Overreact much?
Of course I don't want you to roll over and play dead. I would like you to play nice, though. Pontificating about the purported evils and falsehoods of modern science with nothing to back you up in terms of evidence is not nice. Nor is it likely to elicit a calm response.
Praxiteles said:What's with addressing me in the third person? Do you do that in real life when you're talking to people?
Your claim is that they do science. That's great. By all means feel free to back that up with something. (eg. An example).
A Freethinker said:Floodnut, before this conversation continues, I think it's important that you do some "growing up". You are only hurting your argument by acting so immature. If you want an example, read just about any of your posts in this thread.
Let's get back on topic, shall we?
Floodnut, Please answer my question about the distant visible stars, if you would be so kind.
Douglaangu v2.0 said:So what you're saying not only is god misleading, but he's doing it for our amusment?
Douglaangu v2.0 said:Firstly, who was this witness, and how did they view the stars being 'hung'.
Secondly, are you seriously saying that you don't consider it misleading if the universe was created to, in all possible ways, appear old?
Lamb dressed as Mutton?
Nightson said:So the rest of the universe was created for the sole purpose of giving us something interesting to look at? Rather wasteful of him don't you think? Especially all the parts that we can't see.
Elduran said:I have used no such tactic against you. However, since you've now admitted that you intend to patronise and ridicule me, and have the audacity to suggest that I am the one lying here when all around you you can see the continued assertions that science says things it doesn't, I think you've earned yourself a place on my ignore list.
My reading here will be considerably less painful without your contributions
God says that "Heaven and earth will pass away but my Word will not pass away" I am holding on to the things of God rather than the things of this earth which are temporal. Laugh if you must but remember if what you say is happening it might well be the beginning of the prophecy I referred to.A Freethinker said:Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Wow, that is funny. You totally sidestepped my question, totally. Good job there. God didn't create a universe for us to look at, you need to get off of your high horse and realize a few things. Our galaxy is doomed to be ripped apart by Andromeda, and our entire cluster is doomed to be crushed into other clusters as we approach the Great Attractor. God put all that stuff up there for us to look at? If so, then why is all this action occuring? Following your "logic", the cosmos would be stationary.
Again, you need to realize that you're wrong. Your statement is complete nonsense.
Be glad to Have done it to many of the morre rude one's.Floodnut said:WOW! Is there a way to ignore ignorant contentios spiteful posts? Could someone clue me in on how to do it? Not that I am saying Elduran is making such posts, but how would I put someone on "IGNORE" if that need should arise?
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?