Noah's ark program on BBC

Ark-Guy · Mar 27, 2004

gluadys,

What makes you think God made it look like the earth is billions of years old? Personally I think the scientific records make the earth appear young.

Now labeling God a liar is also another failed argument presented by those that fervently believe in evolutionISM.

Does creating Adam as a mature man or creating a tree with out a seed make God liar? I don't think so...especially considering GOD TOLD US WHAT HE DID.

gluadys · Mar 27, 2004

Ark-Guy said:
gluadys,

What makes you think God made it look like the earth is billions of years old? Personally I think the scientific records make the earth appear young.

Mostly the geologic records: massive coral reefs, thick layers of shale, annual varves going back long before the presumed YEC creation, angular non-conformities, that sort of thing. Of course radio-metric dating helps as well.

What do you see in the scientific records that says otherwise?

Now labeling God a liar is also another failed argument presented by those that fervently believe in evolutionISM.

Not at all. Unless you contend the earth was not created by God at all. If the earth is God's creation, it is also a witness to how God created. And it is a witness direct from the hand of God, unlike the bible which is filtered through human imagination and comprehension.

Does creating Adam as a mature man or creating a tree with out a seed make God liar? I don't think so...especially considering GOD TOLD US WHAT HE DID.

But God did not tell us that. A Hebrew writer told us that. Did God tell the Hebrew writer? How do you know? There is a good deal of evidence that the Hebrew writer borrowed his story of creation from the Babylonians and re-jigged it to conform with the monotheistic belief he was promoting.

Bushido216 · Mar 27, 2004

The Lord is my banner said:
Well if you're going to redefine the word "scientist" we've got a communication problem here!

So, according to you, any scientist who doesn't buck the trend, who interprets their data according to the currently accepted tradition, is no longer worthy of bearing that name.

Oh wait, didn't something like that happen when Charles Darwin put a new theory forward?

Did Darwin ignore data or not follow the scientific method? No. Then he didn't break any rules.

Try again, and this time around, don't waste my time.

Bushido216 · Mar 27, 2004

Ark-Guy said:
Creationist are idolators and heretics?????? You confuse me.

The bible says the creation was a six day period with a day of rest...confirmed by the ten commandments and writing of early christians.

The bible says Adam was formed from the dust then Eve from his side....confirmed by the NT writers......and you call us idolators and heretics because we believe what the bible says?????

The next thing you know you'll be calling us idolators and heretics because we believe Jesus rose from the dead despite science has proven it to be scientifically impossible.

I cannot count how many times I have corrected that statement.

Science says that "a man cannot rise from the dead after three days". Then we have the new data of Jesus' resurrection. Since we cannot use theory to disprove data, we must fit this new data into our theory so that our theory fits the data. In this instance, the new theory is "a man cannot rise from the dead after three days unless a deity intervenes".

Bushido216 · Mar 27, 2004

Ark-Guy said:
gluadys,

What makes you think God made it look like the earth is billions of years old? Personally I think the scientific records make the earth appear young.

Now labeling God a liar is also another failed argument presented by those that fervently believe in evolutionISM.

Does creating Adam as a mature man or creating a tree with out a seed make God liar? I don't think so...especially considering GOD TOLD US WHAT HE DID.

Making a tree look old and telling us it's old doesn't make Him a liar. Telling us that the universe is young and making it look old makes Him a liar.

KleinerApfel · Mar 28, 2004

Bushido

Try again, and this time around, don't waste my time.

If you're so time-poor why don't you spend less of the precious commodity here - since in your words:

"Arguing with idiots is like banging your head on a rock. All you end up with is a headache and nothing to show for it."

My reply was perfectly valid. You can argue all you like, but many scientists working "properly" do support the creationist view.

Ark-Guy · Mar 28, 2004

Ark-Guy · Mar 28, 2004

Who says the universe looks old?? You???

Bushido216 · Mar 28, 2004

Bushido216 said:
Did Darwin ignore data or not follow the scientific method? No. Then he didn't break any rules.

Try again, and this time around, don't waste my time.

Respond to this post, Lord is my Banner, or don't waste my time. What part didn't you get?

ThePhoenix · Mar 29, 2004

Bushido216 said:
I cannot count how many times I have corrected that statement.

Science says that "a man cannot rise from the dead after three days". Then we have the new data of Jesus' resurrection. Since we cannot use theory to disprove data, we must fit this new data into our theory so that our theory fits the data. In this instance, the new theory is "a man cannot rise from the dead after three days unless a deity intervenes".

Wait... weren't 90% of the corrections made to a poster named Arc_Guy who was banned for being obnoxious and intolerable? I'm seeing a connection...

KleinerApfel · Mar 29, 2004

Tell you what Bushido,

it's not worth getting upset about. I'll take a rain check and let the tougher and more learned sweat it out!

Let's agree to differ peacefully.

See you in our Father's house one day, where we'll no longer be concerned who was right on this one anyway.

(Though I may still be tempted to venture here at times!)

Meantime, every blessing be yours in Jesus.

Susana.

Bushido216 · Mar 29, 2004

The Lord is my banner said:
Tell you what Bushido,

it's not worth getting upset about. I'll take a rain check and let the tougher and more learned sweat it out!

Let's agree to differ peacefully.

See you in our Father's house one day, where we'll no longer be concerned who was right on this one anyway.

(Though I may still be tempted to venture here at times!)

Meantime, every blessing be yours in Jesus.

Susana.

Don't take it personally. I just don't want to have to keep up with shifting goal posts.

Bushido216 · Mar 29, 2004

ThePhoenix said:
Wait... weren't 90% of the corrections made to a poster named Arc_Guy who was banned for being obnoxious and intolerable? I'm seeing a connection...

It was Ark Guy, no underscore. And yes. It is he. There is also speculation that he was DURANG0 for a while.

gluadys · Mar 29, 2004

He's also well-known on beliefnet.com as Yec and John Crawford. I expect he has several other aliases as well.

Bushido216 · Mar 29, 2004

You mean he and John Crawford are the same guy? That's creepy.

gluadys · Mar 29, 2004

Depends. Maybe there is more than one John Crawford. All I know is that's a name he uses on beliefnet when he wants to say evolution=racism.

Noah's ark program on BBC

Ark-Guy

Guest

Legend

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

When I awake I am still with You

Ark-Guy

Guest

Ark-Guy

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

When I awake I am still with You

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Legend

Well-Known Member

Legend

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency