Taking Questions on Creationism

[Subduction Zone]

Just saw your question. No this is not scientific evidence of evolution...they are what's left of the last people to disagree with you.

LOL! Fear the Zone!

 

[pitabread]

How many independent biological lineages were created per Genesis 1? How does one biologically distinguish between independent lineages (e.g. what discontinuity markers would one use)?

So I guess these questions will never get answered. So much for knowing anything about creationism. :/

 

[BobRyan]

You got questions, I got answers.

Nice to have answers on that topic rather than just endless snipping against the Bible as some might prefer. I like the premise for this thread!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nice to have answers on that topic rather than just endless snipping against the Bible as some might prefer. I like the premise for this thread!

Abuse of the Bible ends up with it being "snipped" (scissors?) at. Once again let's go over the basics of science. I know that creationists do not want to do that because it refutes almost all of their claims when they do. Two concepts:

And:

"Scientific evidence is evidence that serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretable in accordance with scientific method. Standards for scientific evidence vary according to the field of inquiry, but the strength of scientific evidence is generally based on the results of statistical analysis and the strength of scientific controls."

Understanding these two concepts takes away the arguments of creationists.

 

[LoricaLady]

You got questions, I got answers.

I admire your calm and class in your posts.

 

[BobRyan]

Abuse of the Bible ends up with it being "snipped" (scissors?) at.

Is it your claim as a stated atheist - that atheists are known for not abusing the Bible?

 

[BobRyan]

Once again let's go over the basics of science. I know that creationists do not want to do that because it refutes almost all of their claims when they do.

You start off with a false statement with the hope that your post will "improve" over time?

Christians created almost all the major branches of science - not atheists.

How is it that we keep having this same debate over irrefutable historic facts that you are opposed to?

Christians do not believe in "stories easy enough to tell" when it comes to making stuff up about "how one thing came from another" because as even world-class atheist evolutionists like Collin Patterson admit those stories are "not science".

 

[Speedwell]

Is it your claim as a stated atheist - that atheists are known for not abusing the Bible?

In my experience it rarely happens. Mostly it's literal inerrancy that gets "abused."

 

[BobRyan]

concepts:

oh great! I love it when someone does that supporting Intelligent Design. Do tell.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
Is it your claim as a stated atheist - that atheists are known for not abusing the Bible?

In my experience it rarely happens. Mostly it's literal inerrancy that gets "abused."

So then your claim is that the atheists are the gold-standard when it comes to teaching what the Bible actually says? You might then enjoy joining the atheist professors of Old Testament studies and Hebrew Language in all world-class universities, when they admit that Genesis is not allegory but rather historic account (when dealing with the "kind of literature that it is"). So even though they declare the Bible to be false - they at least know what kind of writing it is -- and in that regard are in agreement with Christians all through the ages.

They freely admit "Moses was no darwinist" and Moses was "Not trying to teach darwinism under the guise of allegory to the newly freed Israelite slaves from Egypt - when writing the book of Genesis". Rather the text teaches that there was literal 7 day week for creation week in which all life on Earth was created.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is it your claim as a stated atheist - that atheists are known for not abusing the Bible?

No. Why would they want to do that? I see certain creationists doing that here.

 

[Speedwell]

You start off with a false statement with the hope that your post will "improve" over time?

Christians created almost all the major branches of science - not atheists.

How is it that we keep having this same debate over irrefutable historic facts that you are opposed to?

You have to allow some Muslims in there as well, for their contributions to math, astronomy and medical science. But yes, they were mostly all theists of one kind or another. So what? Nobody's debating it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So then your claim is that the atheists are the gold-standard when it comes to teaching what the Bible actually says? You might then enjoy joining the atheist professors of Old Testament studies and Hebrew Language in all world-class universities, when they admit that Genesis is not allegory but rather historic account (when dealing with the "kind of literature that it is"). So even though they declare the Bible to be false - they at least know what kind of writing it is -- and in that regard are in agreement with Christians all through the ages.

They freely admit "Moses was no darwinist" and Moses was "Not trying to teach darwinism under the guise of allegory to the newly freed Israelite slaves from Egypt - when writing the book of Genesis". Rather the text teaches that there was literal 7 day week for creation week in which all life on Earth was created.

You need to back that up with some valid sources. I am pretty sure that biblical scholars did not claim that it was historic. By the way, how do you know that they are atheistic?

Nor did he say that the atheists were the gold standard. Why argue in such a manner?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You start off with a false statement with the hope that your post will "improve" over time?

Christians created almost all the major branches of science - not atheists.

How is it that we keep having this same debate over irrefutable historic facts that you are opposed to?

Christians do not believe in "stories easy enough to tell" when it comes to making stuff up about "how one thing came from another" because as even world-class atheist evolutionists like Collin Patterson admit those stories are "not science".

You do realize at that time it was largely illegal to be an atheist, don't you? It is pretty hard to be a successful scientist when one ends up being burned at the stake for that non-offense.

And the problem is that you tend to get your history wrong. That is why we get into a least some of these debates. But let's give it another shot.

 

[Subduction Zone]

oh great! I love it when someone does that supporting Intelligent Design. Do tell.

That does not support Intelligent Design. In fact there is no scientific evidence for ID. If you understood that post you would see this.

But here is your chance to prove it: What reasonable test could possibly refute ID?

 

[inquiring mind]

You do realize at that time it was largely illegal to be an atheist, don't you? It is pretty hard to be a successful scientist when one ends up being burned at the stake for that non-offense.

And you're telling that to Christians, one of the most persecuted groups in history.

 

[Speedwell]

So then your claim is that the atheists are the gold-standard when it comes to teaching what the Bible actually says?

I would trust an atheist before I would trust a biblical literalist.

You might then enjoy joining the atheist professors of Old Testament studies and Hebrew Language in all world-class universities, when they admit that Genesis is not allegory but rather historic account (when dealing with the "kind of literature that it is"). So even though they declare the Bible to be false - they at least know what kind of writing it is -- and in that regard are in agreement with Christians all through the ages.

Oh my, yes. If Genesis is not allegory then it must be 100% accurate literal history because there is no other possible alternative.

(I'm glad you cleared that up for us.)

They freely admit "Moses was no darwinist" and Moses was "Not trying to teach darwinism under the guise of allegory to the newly freed Israelite slaves from Egypt - when writing the book of Genesis". Rather the text teaches that there was literal 7 day week for creation week in which all life on Earth was created.

Who is so ignorant as to suppose that Moses was "trying to teach darwinism under the guise of allegory to the newly freed Israelite slaves from Egypt?" Moses never heard of Darwinism or the modern theory of evolution, and there is nothing allegorical or otherwise about biological evolution in Genesis.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And you're telling that to Christians, one of the most persecuted groups in history.

What? Hardly. They were persecuted early in their history, but not very much since then. If you want to talk persecution talk to the Jews. Or even atheists.

Sadly, in the U.S. at any rate, not being able to force their religion upon others is often seen as "persecution" by some Christians.

 

[LoricaLady]

So then your claim is that the atheists are the gold-standard when it comes to teaching what the Bible actually says? You might then enjoy joining the atheist professors of Old Testament studies and Hebrew Language in all world-class universities, when they admit that Genesis is not allegory but rather historic account (when dealing with the "kind of literature that it is"). So even though they declare the Bible to be false - they at least know what kind of writing it is -- and in that regard are in agreement with Christians all through the ages.j

They freely admit "Moses was no darwinist" and Moses was "Not trying to teach darwinism under the guise of allegory to the newly freed Israelite slaves from Egypt - when writing the book of Genesis". Rather the text teaches that there was literal 7 day week for creation week in which all life on Earth was created.

For you - or anyone else who hasn't seen it yet - there has been wonderful archaeological evidence uncovered for Moses and the Exodus and the stay in the desert. Pictures. Videos. Amazing stuff. The presenters in the vid are not the only ones to have been to the site they reveal.

 

[SelfSim]

Oh boy ... Is thread on a fast track to lockdown , or what?