STILL no evidence FOR creation/ID

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Amen. I have moved on. BTW, it's Tubal

Tubal, Tabal. Tomayto, Tomato.

 

[Ophiolite]

You mock them because you cannot show where they are wrong. It's the same with most unbelievers, so don't run away, it's what makes these boards so much fun. It's really interesting to see some God haters run away because they have nothing but negativism to offer. God Bless you

I'm reasonably sure the only person I have mocked is you.( It's a bad habit, but very limited in its application.) This is because you are the only person whose ideas are so far from those of even the more unusual Christian sects that I am amazed you are allowed to continue posting.
There is nothing in your hypotheses that merits serious attention because the ideas are so amazingly silly. You make ludicrous assertions willy nilly and the only support you offer is various crazy interpretations of the Bible. I will say this - if these hypotheses are original to you (and I have seen nothing like them anywhere else) then you are to be commended upon your inventiveness, but a career in fiction writing would be more suitable than one as an evangelist.
Phonolite differentiation.

 

[Aman777]

I'm reasonably sure the only person I have mocked is you.( It's a bad habit, but very limited in its application.) This is because you are the only person whose ideas are so far from those of even the more unusual Christian sects that I am amazed you are allowed to continue posting.
There is nothing in your hypotheses that merits serious attention because the ideas are so amazingly silly. You make ludicrous assertions willy nilly and the only support you offer is various crazy interpretations of the Bible. I will say this - if these hypotheses are original to you (and I have seen nothing like them anywhere else) then you are to be commended upon your inventiveness, but a career in fiction writing would be more suitable than one as an evangelist.
Phonolite differentiation.

Then go ahead and show your notion that you can prove me wrong either Scientifically, Historically or Scripturally. You cannot but I welcome your attempt. Many have tried, even Dad, but most run away. Amen?

BTW, I am but a man who reads and studies Scripture. I am not a writer nor an Evangelist. What I have discovered agrees in every way with every discovery of Science.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then go ahead and show your notion that you can prove me wrong either Scientifically, Historically or Scripturally. You cannot but I welcome your attempt. Many have tried, even Dad, but most run away. Amen?

BTW, I am but a man who reads and studies Scripture. I am not a writer nor an Evangelist. What I have discovered agrees in every way with every discovery of Science.

I've never run away, you just kinda ignored me after a while or went off onto another topic. For example, in terms of history, you disagree with the timing of when agriculture started, and you are simply incorrect in thinking that agriculture is a sign of intelligence (considering the fact that ants instinctively perform agriculture). You've never been able to actually counter these.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I've never run away, you just kinda ignored me after a while or went off onto another topic. For example, in terms of history, you disagree with the timing of when agriculture started, and you are simply incorrect in thinking that agriculture is a sign of intelligence (considering the fact that ants instinctively perform agriculture). You've never been able to actually counter these.

That would require a definition of intelligence. I admit we tend to label us as the only intelligent creature in our hubris.

 

[PsychoSarah]

That would require a definition of intelligence. I admit we tend to label us as the only intelligent creature in our hubris.

Aman777 views agriculture as some aspect of intelligence in and of itself, but that's like saying that human intelligence didn't exist until the invention of the car, since from our perspective, agriculture is an innovation just as much as cars are. I think he views the reason why agriculture is kinda recent in terms of the human timeline is because prior to that point, the bipedal apes of this planet were too stupid to accomplish it, but since organisms objectively far lesser to ourselves in intellect (such as ants) instinctively do it, I disagree. You'd be hard pressed to call ants more intelligent than humans, no matter how you define intelligence. Note that Aman is not a YEC like you are, and that he has a very... unorthodox biblical interpretation to say the least. I doubt that you'll find any of your views to be compatible with his on the matter.

I view anything with the capacity to learn as having some form of intelligence. I view anything that is self aware as being very intelligent, such as elephants and dolphins.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Aman777 views agriculture as some aspect of intelligence in and of itself, but that's like saying that human intelligence didn't exist until the invention of the car, since from our perspective, agriculture is an innovation just as much as cars are. I think he views the reason why agriculture is kinda recent in terms of the human timeline is because prior to that point, the bipedal apes of this planet were too stupid to accomplish it, but since organisms objectively far lesser to ourselves in intellect (such as ants) instinctively do it, I disagree. You'd be hard pressed to call ants more intelligent than humans, no matter how you define intelligence. Note that Aman is not a YEC like you are, and that he has a very... unorthodox biblical interpretation to say the least. I doubt that you'll find any of your views to be compatible with his on the matter.

I view anything with the capacity to learn as having some form of intelligence. I view anything that is self aware as being very intelligent, such as elephants and dolphins.

I'm not a YEC either btw. I believe the earth is radiometrically billions of years old, but that scientists just ignore relativity and time dilation when it comes to dating the earth. It's true age is unknown and unknowable due to variables we do not know the answers to. I don't believe dinosaurs were created with man. Why would I hold to 1) unscriptual views, and 2) views which the Works of God do not support? Didn't the same author pen them both - at least in my view He did.

I understand that some mistake the 6th creation (the creation of man) as being the entire creation. But this view is based upon incorrect interpretations of the Hebrew words themselves. In fact you can show them the actual meaning of the Hebrew words in question and they'll blind themselves to it, even if it is in black and white before their eyes.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I'm not a YEC either btw. I believe the earth is radiometrically billions of years old, but that scientists just ignore relativity and time dilation when it comes to dating the earth. It's true age is unknown and unknowable due to variables we do not know the answers to. I don't believe dinosaurs were created with man. Why would I hold to 1) unscriptual views, and 2) views which the Works of God do not support? Didn't the same author pen them both - at least in my view He did.

I understand that some mistake the 6th creation (the creation of man) as being the entire creation. But this view is based upon incorrect interpretations of the Hebrew words themselves. In fact you can show them the actual meaning of the Hebrew words in question and they'll blind themselves to it, even if it is in black and white before their eyes.

Yeah, but Aman views the universe as being even older than mainstream science does, with Adam also living for billions of years and Noah living in an entirely different world than this one that floated above Lake Van and believing that agriculture didn't exist on this world until after the flood. Truly, it is the strangest biblical interpretation of them all.

 

[Aman777]

I've never run away, you just kinda ignored me after a while or went off onto another topic. For example, in terms of history, you disagree with the timing of when agriculture started,

I can find only ONE instance when Science, History and Scripture agreed on when Human agriculture began. The only Truth which agrees in every way is that Human farming first began in Mesopotamia, the land between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers just SW of Lake Van, Turkey, in the mountains of Ararat. Do you have another instance which agrees in every way?

and you are simply incorrect in thinking that agriculture is a sign of intelligence (considering the fact that ants instinctively perform agriculture). You've never been able to actually counter these.

Ants are pre-programmed and do NOT have the ability to Judge good and evil. Only God and Humans do. Genesis 3:22 You're either born Human, with the ability you inherited from Adam or you are NOT a Human, no matter what Science falsely teaches. Amen

 

[Ophiolite]

Then go ahead and show your notion that you can prove me wrong either Scientifically, Historically or Scripturally. You cannot but I welcome your attempt. Many have tried, even Dad, but most run away. Amen?.

You don't get it, do you? (That's rhetorical, by the way.) Your assertions are so disjointed, self-evidently contradictory, refuted by science, scripture, consensus, common sense, logic, reason, etc that they do no require any attempt at disproving. They disprove themselves by their inherent character.

Your belief that they are confirmed by and are consistent with the findings of science are ludicrous and rather sad. As Fermi (I think it was Fermi) said in another context, your beliefs are not even wrong. (To be wrong they would have to have some sort of attachment to reality. They do not.)

Your self-deception is so powerful that no argument yet presented, or any that might be presented in future would dissuade you. Why would I waste any more time engaging with the pathos of your condition?

 

[Aman777]

You don't get it, do you? (That's rhetorical, by the way.) Your assertions are so disjointed, self-evidently contradictory, refuted by science, scripture, consensus, common sense, logic, reason, etc that they do no require any attempt at disproving. They disprove themselves by their inherent character.

Is that WHY you cannot refute me Scripturally, Scientifically or Historically? Of course it is. Bags of wind blowhard but when cornered, they cannot produce a single rebuttal. God Bless you