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.
Is He now? A deceiver wouldn't document what He did, when He did it, and how He did it, would He?
you can protest all you want that you are not a YEC promoting the Omphalos hypothesis but we all know that if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck, looks like a duck and flies like a duck it is not a chicken no matter how you try to dress it up.
1. you can't create an apple.
Is He now? A deceiver wouldn't document what He did, when He did it, and how He did it, would He?
I notice you totally ignored most of my post including my second point about your goofy "Apple Challenge".Do you know what a hypothetical is?
It was commendable of MrGoodbytes and several others to treat your bogus analogy with respect rather than the derision it so richly deserves.How's come MrGoodBytes treated it as such (i.e. with respect)?
I know that several people have already answered it even though it is totally absurd. Do you just keep bringing up this stupid analogy because you hope to distract attention from the fact that you are totally unable to support your mythology with any evidence?Truth of the matter is, you know better than to try and answer it.
Now since you have admitted that you have no evidence for creationism why do you keep posting on a thread asking for evidence of creationism?
The way I understand it, he's saying it was made to LOOK old and all, without actually being such. The argument against him is that if this is so, then the god of the bible is a rather caddish sort. Of course, his argument could be true. God could be real and he just likes to play jokes on incredulous people so he can burn them later...But Ockham's Razor does a cruel number on that sort of tortured logic.Because there is no evidence.
And AV, I've read through that thread before. It didn't clear it up to me. Since we're already off topic maybe you could say how you can have age without history. From what I've seen they go together.
Because there is no evidence.
And AV, I've read through that thread before. It didn't clear it up to me. Since we're already off topic maybe you could say how you can have age without history. From what I've seen they go together.
Now since you have admitted that you have no evidence for creationism why do you keep posting on a thread asking for evidence of creationism?
Thus why would there be a thread asking for it?
Because, for us to consider 6000 year ex-nihilo creation, there must be evidence.
We must be able to study it and learn from it.
If there is not (either becuase it didn't happen that way, or God has gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure it doesn't look like it happened that way), then there is no point considering it.
As I pointed out above, (and you neatly skipped over), your version of creationism is useless.
Other creationist say there is evidence for creation, but so far they seem to be keeping it to themselves.
Why would anyone want to believe in something that there is absolutely no evidence for? Creationism is completely useless as a model then.That thread got you (plural) to admit there's no evidence for ex nihilo creation.
Thus why would there be a thread asking for it?
Why would anyone want to believe in something that there is absolutely no evidence for?
Creationism is completely useless as a model then.
If there can be no evidence of ex nihilo creation, thats fine, but it CANT be a scientific theory
Not all Christians agree with you on this.Because we Christians accept the Bible as a valid replacement for evidence.
All models are approximations.So be it --- models are made to be broken.
If there can be no evidence of ex nihilo creation, thats fine, but it CANT be a scientific theory
Please tell that to your fellow Creationists who keep trying to sneak it into our school system.It never was.
(Perhaps my friend can configure molecules from his own body into apples, or from the air or from the sand, or perhaps he can warp space and take particles from somewhere else, or warp time and take an apple from somewhere in the past, or perhaps there's a naturalistic process by which matter can be created...)
Wikipedia said:Ex nihilo is a Latin term meaning "out of nothing". It is often used in conjunction with the term creation, as in creatio ex nihilo, meaning "creation out of nothing". Due to the nature of this term, it is often used in philosophical or creationistic arguments, as many Christians, Muslims and Jews believe that God created the universe from nothing. This contrasts with "creatio ex materia," which is creation out of eternally preexistent matter, and "creatio ex deo," which is creation out of the being of God.
Not all Christians agree with you on this.
All models are approximations.
Please tell that to your fellow Creationists who keep trying to sneak it into our school system.
I'll ask you again: Why would anyone bother believing in a model that has no evidence and makes absolutely no predictions? You have made Creationism into a useless story.Specifically, I'm addressing those who ask for evidence of Creation.
As I said before, I plan to direct anyone I see asking for evidence of Creation to my Apple Challenge, and see if they are willing to take it.
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?