My Reconciliation Challenge

[Wiccan_Child]

Our faith can only be as strong as the accuracy of God's Word:

[bible]Romans 10:17[/bible]

I hate to butt in at such a late stage (I lie, I don't, but what they hay ) but your faith is limited only by your ability for self-delusion: that's the whole gоddаmn point of faith! Defining the limits of your faith according to a priori assumptions on the Bible is as recursive as using logical arguments to refute Logic itself (I use a captial 'L' because logic is, as we all know, the almighty Athe).

And given the fact that we are going to be judged from what's written therein, I'd say God, whose name is Jealous, would have no objection to keeping His words accurate.

That may be so, but the point is that no two Christian denominations agree on what God's word actually is. As a rough example, liberal Christians say God accepts gays and gay sex, while more literalist Christians believe to the contrary.

 

[Psudopod]

Let's say only two people in the world exist. We'll call them Adam and Eve. Adam lives in England, and Eve lives in the United States. Eve visits England and happens to enter your home when you're not there. She reads in your diary that you dropped an egg yesterday, and it splattered all over the floor, making a big mess. There is no trace of egg on the floor whatsoever. No egg shells, no yolk, no white, no nothing. Knowing that only two people on earth exist --- who cleaned up the egg mess?

It's not just the fact that there is no evidence of a flood, it's the fact that there are things that contracdict the existance of a global flood.

Now, I could buy God getting rid of all the waters so the earth was habitable again, but why did he bother putting in all the evidence that life had been carrying on just fine while the flood as happening. Why all that fake Egyptian history? Why all the animal tracks and burrows in the flood deposits?

 

[RealityCheck]

Would you call that "faith"?

Making assumptions is not faith. It's part of the deductive (or inductive) reasoning process. You presented a situation that assumed that someone's written word was absolutely correct. Others have assumed there are different possibilities.

None of this has anything to do with faith. Though it could be said that you have put faith into the notion that when someone writes something, it must be true.

 

[RealityCheck]

Let's say only two people in the world exist. We'll call them Adam and Eve. Adam lives in England, and Eve lives in the United States. Eve visits England and happens to enter your home when you're not there. She reads in your diary that you dropped an egg yesterday, and it splattered all over the floor, making a big mess. There is no trace of egg on the floor whatsoever. No egg shells, no yolk, no white, no nothing. Knowing that only two people on earth exist --- who cleaned up the egg mess?

Wait, whose house? Mine? But I'm not Adam. Now there's three people in the world. Sheesh. Can't get your own story straight.

 

[FishFace]

It's not just the fact that there is no evidence of a flood, it's the fact that there are things that contracdict the existance of a global flood.

Indeed. Imagine the egg thing, but as well as coming in and there being no egg on the floor, we find that the floor is thick pile carpet. The pile would have picked up egg and would have had permanent stains, so the egg couldn't have broken on it. The carpet is also stuck down with a glue that requires several days to set, so it must have been down before the egg was dropped. There is a full box of eggs in the fridge and no trace of any empty one in any of the bins, not any eggshells or bits of white or yolk, even though the dustbin men haven't been for almost a week.

Not only did Adam apparently clean up the egg mess, but you are asking us to believe that he got rid of the eggs and the box outside his house, and he fitted a thick, stainable carpet after the flood without there being enough time for the glue to set.

 

[RealityCheck]

Indeed. Imagine the egg thing, but as well as coming in and there being no egg on the floor, we find that the floor is thick pile carpet. The pile would have picked up egg and would have had permanent stains, so the egg couldn't have broken on it. The carpet is also stuck down with a glue that requires several days to set, so it must have been down before the egg was dropped. There is a full box of eggs in the fridge and no trace of any empty one in any of the bins, not any eggshells or bits of white or yolk, even though the dustbin men haven't been for almost a week.

Not only did Adam apparently clean up the egg mess, but you are asking us to believe that he got rid of the eggs and the box outside his house, and he fitted a thick, stainable carpet after the flood without there being enough time for the glue to set.

The egg all got sucked up to Mars and is still there trapped under the rocks. And you just aren't looking hard enough for the carton. There's evidence that the carton is buried on Mt Ararat and there's pictures of it, but that all gets hushed up by the scientists.


(Lost my Poe hat, sorry.)

 

[TheBear]

http://christianforums.com/t6793820-the-big-kahuna.html

 

[necroforest]

Why?

 

[MattTheAgnostic]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

That's a contradiction my friend, only one can be correct (or neither).

 

[madarab]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

There are only four lights!

 

[AV1611VET]

That's a contradiction my friend, only one can be correct (or neither).

I respectfully disagree.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Can you reconcile these:

1. This thread died 9 years ago
2. This thread lasted for 15 days

 

[AV1611VET]

Can you reconcile these:

1. This thread died 9 years ago
2. This thread lasted for 15 days

LOL -- nothing to reconcile.

Let's see you reconcile the OP, using your best science.

 

[quatona]

How would you reconcile these two statements w/o being disrespectful to either one:

1. This rock has been in existence for 6100 years.
2. This rock is 4.57 billion years old.

Why would I even try to do that?