Taking questions of the Different state past (2)

[dad]

No, you assume a state then model according, in an anti realityway.

The bible may seem like that to you. Not millions of others.

There are 2 models to chose from, the Anti evidence one which attacks reality and the things science says, or the one that includes evidence.

Do not pretend to have evidence for your godless fantasy state here. It is M.I.A.

So you're main problem with science is that you disagree with it.

No, it disagrees with God and His word, and is not really science, but Satanic doctrines of devils.

Are you saying that any Christian who accepts and ancient world, same state past and evolution isn't a real Christian? Oh no! Isn't that against the rules?

No. I am saying Jesus the prophets, and apostles and writers of Scripture all accepted creation. Name me one Christian who can say the bible is wrong when it says that the world was made by him (Jesus)!!?

I'll side with the evidence from reality, thank you.

You can side with the cookie monster for all I care. Reality is a stranger to the godless, and evidence is an abused word, that has no real meaning when the religious zealots of so called science bandy it about.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Using the word woman means all that? You thought this was a dating site??

The tone was suggestive.

 

[dad]

The tone was suggestive.

Thank you. A place for everything, and everything in it's place.

Science ought to get a grasp on that concept. There is a place for the present state and laws. That place is not in the far future or past. Period.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Thank you. A place for everything, and everything in it's place.

Suggestive that you are single that is.

 

[Split Rock]

Question: why are people still engaging an obvious troll?

Quit whining if you have nothing to say woman.

"Keep your women silent in church, and in this forum!" Right dad ?

 

[Split Rock]

Suggestive that you are single that is.

No, more like dad is a sexist misogynist.

 

[dad]

"Keep your women silent in church, and in this forum!" Right dad ?

No women should post. However the whining bit was the issue. We all need to have something to say. There are women in heaven, despite the fact that there will be a half hour silence there as the final period begins.

 

[dad]

Suggestive that you are single that is.

I am at the moment.

 

[CabVet]

I am at the moment.

No, more like dad is a sexist misogynist.

Maybe the two things are related. Just saying.

 

[dad]

Maybe the two things are related. Just saying.

Right. Maybe, except that the latter was made up, and the former is temporary. ..Again, much like the same state past basis science uses!

 

[Delphiki]

I'm sure there's plenty of extremely desperate fish in the sea.

 

[dad]

So here is another anonymous question from the mail--



"Hi dad, I need your help again. I'm curious how you refute atheist who make arguments against the bible, things concerning talking snake, talking donkey etc.. They say animals can't talk. Humans could talk because we have a vocal chords while most animals do not. I mean, when bird chirps, dog barks, they are communicating? Their communication doesn't mean it has to be like humans do it, it just means they could be understood. I'm really interested in your rebuttal... because in the bible they animals like a human. I know those aren't literal but am interested in your rebuttal nevertheless. Thanks dad. "

So I said --

"Guess we don't know how communication in heaven occurs as compared to here and now. Wolves and lions will eat grass, that doesn't mean that no changes in their bodies will happen to allow that. It doesn't mean they now can do that, any more than they can now talk.

In the bible we saw that a donkey talked, not that the animal normally could talk, but that Jesus translated the thoughts of the beast into audible words somehow. We cannot use the physical realities of this physical world as the basis for what was or what will be. "

 

[Loudmouth]

I can claim you are full of hot air. To those who disfigure evidence with their beliefs, of course everything will look a certain way.

Notice that you won't even attempt to show that the evidence is inconsistent with a same state past.

Your silence is quite educational. Even you agree that the observations are consistent with a same state past.

 

[dad]

Notice that you won't even attempt to show that the evidence is inconsistent with a same state past.

That depends how you define consistent. Since the whole of your fabricated model of the past was solely predicated upon the idea laws were the same in that past, it HAS to be internally consistent! Yet, to the intelligent and open minded, fair observer who actually thinks about it, you depend on some silly little hot soup speck containing the universe itself, that came from you know not where, and for some unknown reason, spewed forth the universe. You need imaginary first lifeforms that begat man and beast and all life on earth, but can't say what or where this magic wunder was!!! You invoke missing material that you apparently can't prove ever existed as support!! You require imaginary great time that is only conceived in the first place, because you need it to have created what we see by our laws and with no God!!!!!!!! You declare most of the universe missing or invisible dark stuff! You omit anything spiritual from your little sand box of so called science, because you just feel like it!! You wave off all records of ancient history as being from foolish goat herders and reject the spirits that they included in the record. You guys mock and belittle Scripture, and often display a strange denialism, that is similar to Last Thursdayism when it is even mentioned!! Like a Pavlovian reflex response.

You got less than nothing. You want to replace a universe and life that was Intelligently Designed for one that is Insanely Doubted!!

 

[Loudmouth]

That depends how you define consistent. Since the whole of your fabricated model of the past was solely predicated upon the idea laws were the same in that past, it HAS to be internally consistent!

Please explain why a different state past would produce consilient dates between isotope pairs using modern decay rates.

You have never shown why a different state past would produce evidence that is indistinguishable from a same state past.

 

[dad]

Please explain why a different state past would produce consilient dates between isotope pairs using modern decay rates.

You seem to think we should accept that any state of the past did it!! Foolishness and blind religion. God created.

Gottcha.

 

[Loudmouth]

You seem to think we should accept that any state of the past did it!!

False. I have shown that the evidence is consistent with a same state past.

You have never been able to explain why a different state past would produce those same observations.

The evidence stands, and it stands in favor of a same state past.

 

[dad]

False. I have shown that the evidence is consistent with a same state past.

False. You have shown that you insist on accepting your beliefs for the unknowns. Your self created circular 'consistencies' are a joke.

You have never been able to explain why a different state past would produce those same observations.

No past produced the stuff in creation. That is almost blasphemy. Foolishness also. Ignorance running wild.

Scripture stands. It stands in favor of a different future state...and a different far past. Your ignorance based biased guesses notwithstanding.

 

[dad]

OK, as Loudmouth putters out here, I will post another email question.

Thanks dad. Appreciate your answer.

One last question. If atheist start throwing their dates on fossils and claim that it's X million years old, which is enough to disprove the bible or a 6,000 yr old earth, what's a good punchline to throw back at them?

I would ask what the basis for the dates is. If there was a different set of laws and nature in the past (?) then it could be that only some animals lasted long enough to be able to get fossilized. If that is the case, then we could have man and most other creatures being alive and here at the same time as those things that died and could fossilize. That would render the fossil record useless for their purposes. The only question is what laws eistxed in the past? They assume and believe that the present ones did. They do not know, far as I can tell.

The same issue is all that matters in radioactive decay. If the isotopes were not under our laws, then why would they have decayed as they now do?? Maybe the daughter material was already here when this present state started, because it was created material, and it only started existing the way it now does (decaying etc) after this nature started. I assume there may have been a nature change after the flood. This seems to fit Scripture as far as I can tell. That would be why it looks old to those who think it was not created, but came to exist only as a result of present processes and laws!

That is my current opinion at least. Now if they can prove a same state in the far past, they would have a case. Until then, they have bad religion.

 

[PsychoSarah]

False. You have shown that you insist on accepting your beliefs for the unknowns. Your self created circular 'consistencies' are a joke.
No past produced the stuff in creation. That is almost blasphemy. Foolishness also. Ignorance running wild.

Scripture stands. It stands in favor of a different future state...and a different far past. Your ignorance based biased guesses notwithstanding.

Hypothetically speaking dad, if your prior state idea were disproven to your satisfaction, you no longer would consider it valid, do you fear it would negatively impact your faith?