David Lamb
Well-Known Member
- May 30, 2024
- 3,112
- 1,643
- 76
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
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.
Thanks for explaining.Large language model. Large language models are the basis for AIs like ChatGPT or Gemini. I was just speculating that truthpls might be an AI.
I was looking at the entirety of the bible. Angels believe in creation. Everyone who was anyone in the bible does as well. So tell us, as a lover of god, do you think that the natural processes science can work with and observe tell us how we came to exist as well as how long ago? On the matter of that pesky rock that was here (in the example) a few days after creation, do you claim science could inspect it and tell us how old it was and where it originated or not? Be clearIt seems to me that you are looking through very small window into what Lovers of God do believe. About God or the natural world, we are not all like you in our thinking.
The natural sciences has opened a window into how God Creates.I was looking at the entirety of the bible. Angels believe in creation. Everyone who was anyone in the bible does as well. So tell us, as a lover of god, do you think that the natural processes science can work with and observe tell us how we came to exist as well as how long ago? On the matter of that pesky rock that was here (in the example) a few days after creation, do you claim science could inspect it and tell us how old it was and where it originated or not? Be clear
So what?Angels believe in creation. Everyone who was anyone in the bible does as well.
Me too. Believing in science does not mean accepting that their natural only based creation stories are valid.Yes, I know that believers in God believe in God...
This is just false. There are plenty of people who believe in God and still believe in science. My husband is one of them.
The evidence in the rock example on day two of creation would say to you and your science believing husband that the rock was billions of years old and came to exist some other way than creation by God. Right? Yet that rock would only have been created the day before. Is that science working to you?If you come and make a claim, then you better believe I'm gonna ask you to prove it.
Ah yes, the old, "I'm not going to bother because you won't believe it anyway" excuse.
If the evidence stands up to scrutiny, yes, I will accept it.
But go ahead and justify why you won't produce this evidence. Nevermind the fact that this evidence never appears to anyone. You're not the only believer to use this excuse and I'm not the only atheist to hear it.
And you can't prove there is no more than the natural world. Here is a little secret though, God proves to those who sincerely seek and accept Jesus that there certainly is! That does not mean He proves it to science or doubters.And you can't prove there is more than the natural world.
As if that was in some doubt?? I think we could have asked a toddler of Adam's if the world existed and they would know. No brownie points for science there.Yet science has proven that the natural world exists.
If you reject the support God gave us, then don't be surprised if your problem of unbelief is not met by GodYes, you can believe whatever you want.
But if you can't provide any actual support for your claims, don't be surprised when your claims are met with disbelief.
There is nothing random about how rocks were the day after creation. If they had isotope ratios, those ratios would be similar to what we see today. Why? Because how many changes in long half lived isotopes could there be in 6000 years?And if that were the case, then they would all be random and we'd NEVER be able to make them fit an old earth.
He did that. If some did not receive it, that changes nothing for the billions of us to whom He revealed and proved Himself over and over. It just means that such people cannot prove anything! Neither that there is or is not a God. Therefore if they model the creation of man and universe on one or the other position, it is baseless. And they do base it on one position and that is the naturalonlydunnitYou need to think about this some more, because you are obviously completely missing the point I am trying to make.
Yes. You claim there is a God, so you need to back up that claim.
He said all those things, and each of the writes recorded some of it.This is a simple concept. You need to learn it.
Option 1, option 2, or option 3 please.
Each of them is different, they can't all be true.
Combined though we are shown! Notice God used four gospels? Did you think that was because it would all be told in one?That's what the Gospels have. NONE of them shows him saying more than one of these.
As far as creation goes, it is useless at best. Look at that day after creation rock and see!Yeah, let's go back to the discussion I was having with AV when you decided to insert yourself. You know, when you said radiometric dating was unreliable.
You think being written in a book makes something unreliable? What does that say for science books?No, you are making a claim because you read that claim in a book.
Ans so it would on day two after creation! You get why that would be wrong?If what you say is true, then one radiometric dating method would show the age as 4 billion years.
If those numbers were applied to a rock 2 days old, what does this say for your methods and numbers?A second method would show the age is 1 million years. A third method would show the age as 50 million years. A fourth method would show the age as 10,000 years. A fifth method would show the age as 200 million years.
The issue with the 2 day old rock is not whether several teams of dissenting scientists agreed or not. The issue is why are they wrongly dating a 2 day old rock!Yet this NEVER HAPPENS.
The different methods ALWAYS AGREE.
It all depends who scrutinizes what. Since the bible says the god of this world blinds the minds of unbelievers, how would we expect them to be able to scrutinize things like fulfilled prophesy?If it can withstand scrutiny, then I will accept it.
You seem to be afraid to expose your alleged evidence to scrutiny.
Assertion based on ignorance. No one knows when Jesus will return to take believers away. Christians are told to be ready as if it were today. We were not told it was some certain day. As for the general lateness of the times, well, that is a topic for another thread.No prophecy, just a fact.
After 2000 years of "any day now," this claim from believers is way past tired.
Once again, you claim that there is no more than the natural world, yet you are completely unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims.Once again, you claim that there is more than the natural world, yet you are completely unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to support your claims.
No one is going to prove scientifically anything about this topic. Certainly not that there in no more than the physical and natural. Just admit the science uses that belief that this natural world is sufficient to know how we were created or came to exist. There can be no denying that science uses this premise.And let's not ignore the ridiculousness of you demanding that I prove my position while at the same time you've stated that you aren't required to provide proof for yours.
So? There is nothing the proves the natural world can tell us about the reality of God and creation either. You are in a lose/lose situationYour lack of comprehension skills is astounding.
I was not claiming that physical things do not exist.
I was saying that there is nothing in the natural world which disproves the idea that the natural world can tell us about reality.
To who? God proves that to those who come to Him. Science cannot prove or disprove or even comprehend that!You have been utterly incapable of proving that anything supernatural exists.
Not if God uses them. Do you think a pen can be wrong about what is written?And they were still people. And people can be wrong.
You holding a belief that it does not exist is not evidence that it does not exist.I am asking you for evidence, why do you keep trying to switch the burden of proof?
Honestly, you have the debate form of a child.
And you holding a belief that there is the supernatural is not evidence that it exists.
Proof?There was no creation week.
If you are arguing against there being more than the natural, why do we see no evidence?The fact that you don't understand the ridiculousness of your position--asking me to assume the thing I am arguing against--shows that your are woefully lacking when it comes to the use of logic.
Then show us this window as we look at a rock that was created 2 days ago? If you were to declare the 2 day old rock 'not created' or billions of years old how would that be a window?The natural sciences has opened a window into how God Creates.
We should all try to be like Jesus. He was under no illusion that the natural explains creation or God! He danced all over the natural world. He proved that there was more.I'll repeat: It seems to me that you are looking through very small window into what Lovers of God do believe. About God or the natural world, we are not all like you in our thinking.
Ask all ya want you've been answered with my opinion loud and clear in post #1070 above
So why fake it?From Google AI:
What is aged cheese? Aged cheese is cheese that is left to ripen for several weeks to several years to develop more flavor and, in the case of many aged cheeses, a firmer and more crystalline texture.
Age is an important ingredient in a lot of things in this universe.
Without age, some things just wouldn't work right.
I think you are.Missed the point, didn't you?
Now there is a basic concept that alone refutes the nonsensical idea of embedded Age.Age requires existence.
So why fake it?
Age requires existence.
And that's what God gave Adam ... existence.
Existence in the way of maturity without history.
He came into existence as a twenty or thirty year old.
Can God create a block of aged cheese tomorrow?
But why would God create a world with billions of years of false history and age?
And yes, I'm still not going to call it embedded because you've not shown that it isn't false.
Here we go again.
False history is Omphalism.
Maturity without history is not false history.
It is no history.
Of course I haven't shown that it isn't false.
It never existed in the first place.
Embedded Age is maturity without history.
You seem to think I'm saying embedded age is "maturity with a false history."
If embedded age is real, that the earth was created 6000-odd years ago and 4.5 billion years ago,
The earth was not created both 6000 and 4.5 billion years ago.
The earth was created 6000 years ago.
Just like the aged cheese that God can create tomorrow.
It doesn't exist yet, but tomorrow it will, and it will be several years old.
It won't grow old ... it will come into existence old.
Mature cheese, but without a history.
It happens all the time in this forum. Bible believers come here and claim that scientific naturalism denies God's authorship of our being, which is a lie.Ha. I don't think AI is a bible believer or Christian. I read recently that multiple AI programs have been caught lying.
I meant to say 'not' instead of and. That as a big faux pas on my part.
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?