- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,726
- 52,530
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
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.
Well, see that is the real difference between real christians and those who assume a role. I'd love for you and everyone else to find CHRIST and be all together in heaven. I don't wish to see anyone miss the boat.
No, AV, an apple is not too hard to comprehend. No matter what object you use, a fork, car, rope, whatever, it will be created as a copy of the original, and will therefore contain the same properties, design, history, age, whatever you want, flaws and all. The universe, however, when created by God, which, I assume, wasn't a copy, should not have any sign of embedded age, history, or whatever, if it was created ex nihilo. If the universe does contain history and embedded age, which it clearly does, we must ask why. The only answer i can think of is that God wished to show age therefore deceiving us.Like I said, Allister, if an apple is too hard to comprehend, use a fork, a rope, a car --- replace it with anything.
All I'm asking is what evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?
I contend that the correct answer this side of omniscience is, "none."
And that answer should satisfy the OP.
The universe, however, when created by God...
Until that rook appears suddenly next to your king. Where did it come from? Ex Nihilo!
The answer is simply this: No --- not outside of the Bible.
Like I said, Allister, if an apple is too hard to comprehend, use a fork, a rope, a car --- replace it with anything.
All I'm asking is what evidence would you use to convince your friend I did this?
I contend that the correct answer this side of omniscience is, "none."
And that answer should satisfy the OP.
The OP asked for evidence outside of scripture and PRATTS. No such evidence exists. Most creationists won't acknowledge that but AV uses his version of the Omphalos Hypothesis to try to explain why there is no evidence.So why should we believe you?
You may answer the question, "why should we believe the Bible" and that'd do.
But if you say, because it makes and fulfills X predictions you are both going to have to justify your value of X and more importantly justify why we should believe a book because it writes that its own predictions were fulfilled.
The point I'm making is, if you make an apple ex nihilo then give it to me and then my mother comes in, she'll be unlikely to believe my claims that the apple appeared ex nihilo as I could have grabbed one from the fruit bowl, from the corner store, etcYou didn't take if from the kitchen though, did you? I (that's me) put it in your hand myself, right? Please focus on the scenario, or you'll confuse yourself.
I'm not taking your apple challenge. I don't think there is a way to test if it was created ex nihilo or not. It is completely irrelevant if it was or was not, what matters is the world we find ourselves in and the abundant evidences in favour of an ancient universe.Allister, let's leave God out of my Apple Challenge, okay? In fact, let's focus on only four things here:
Anything else is just unnecessarily convoluting the hypothetical.
- you
- me
- an apple
- your friend
So why should we believe you?
You may answer the question, "why should we believe the Bible" and that'd do.
But if you say, because it makes and fulfills X predictions you are both going to have to justify your value of X and more importantly justify why we should believe a book because it writes that its own predictions were fulfilled.
Using a myth to explain a myth is not getting us anywhere.
The point I'm making is, if you make an apple ex nihilo then give it to me and then my mother comes in, she'll be unlikely to believe my claims that the apple appeared ex nihilo as I could have grabbed one from the fruit bowl, from the corner store, etc
If you want evidence for creationism, simply read your Bible (if you have one) and visit the numerous creation sites across the Internet.Have you already forgotten what the topic of this thread is already? If you want evidence for evolution, Google is just a click away.
Must... resist urge.. to post.. wrestling video....
The OP asked for evidence outside of the various creationist interpretations of scripture and the numerous creation sites are loaded with PRATTS and examples of logical fallacies particularly hasty generalization the false dichotomy..If you want evidence for creationism, simply read your Bible (if you have one) and visit the numerous creation sites across the Internet.
I'm not taking your apple challenge.
I don't think there is a way to test if it was created ex nihilo or not.
It is completely irrelevant if it was or was not...
Now. back to my statement...
The universe, however, when created by God, which, I assume, wasn't a copy, should not have any sign of embedded age, history, or whatever, if it was created ex nihilo.
If the universe does contain history and embedded age, which it clearly does, we must ask why.
The only answer i can think of is that God wished to show age therefore deceiving us.
If you want evidence for creationism, simply read your Bible (if you have one) and visit the numerous creation sites across the Internet.
I get it only as far as I recognize that you and we both accept the facts: there is no evidence for creation.MrGoodBytes gets it.
And I ask for evidence outside evolutionist circles and get none. And numbers do not count. In pagan Rome the majority of people living were pagans. That did not make Christians turn from Christianity. The lions didn't even change their minds, it would seem. So were the pagans right because that is what their society expected? It would appear not.The OP asked for evidence outside of the various creationist interpretations of scripture and the numerous creation sites are loaded with PRATTS and examples of logical fallacies particularly hasty generalization the flase dichotomy..
I get it only as far as I recognize that you and we both accept the facts: there is no evidence for creation.
The conclusion you draw, however, is utterly irrational. You invented an analogy where a real event A leaves no evidence, and conclude that since we have no evidence for another event B in the real world, this event B actually happened. That's so very wrong that I'm not sure if there is even a name for this type of fallacy.
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?