• 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.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

The insect kinds

talkingmonkey

Active Member
Jan 21, 2008
144
18
Brisneyland
Visit site
✟22,871.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
For instance:
  • Q: How could the Ark withstand the stress of its "voyage"?
  • A: Just like the Israelites' clothes did in the wilderness. **
[bible]Deuteronomy 29:5[/bible]

HUH!?So cos some scrpit writer in Deuteronomy said that someone's clothes didn't fall off, that is sufficient objective knowledge that the ark could withstand the stress of the voyage?

How bout:

Q: How could the Ark withstand the stress of its 'voyage'?
A: Just like the Hunter Killer does in the Terminator Wars.**

**"And they had breastplates, as it were breastplates of iron; and the sound of their wings
was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle."-Revelations 9:9
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You are aware that that really isn't that big aren't you? Even if animals "kinds" got on board instead of individual examples of every animal, we're still talking about a very very large amount of room needed. Way more than 450x75x45.

I couldn't care less if the Ark was 3 cubic feet. As our motto goes: The Bible says it - that settles it.

And by saying that their "kinds" then went on to provide new breeds of animals, you are also aware that that's what most people would call "evolution".

Indeed I am aware of that. We prefer to call it adaptation, but we'll also accept micro-evolution.

Ok. Let me put you straight on a few things here. Pangaea only existed during the paleozoic and mesozoic eras. Which were about 250 million years ago. This predates the old testament by such a long way it isn't even funny.

Oh, really? Well, let me give you one of my oldies-but-goodies:


And the current polar regions have existed since the start of the last ice age, which ENDED 10,000 years ago, again predating the old testament by quite a large amount of time. About 8,800 years before in fact.

Imagine that.

Oh, and the earliest recorded fossils of Polar bears are about 200,000 years old (around the same time man was modern man was becoming the dominant species on Earth). Again, predating the old testament by some way. that's about 198,800 years before the old testament.

As I'm fond of saying: Where science disagrees with Scripture - science is wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Mockingbirdred

Active Member
Feb 5, 2008
68
4
41
Manchester
✟22,708.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
In Relationship
I couldn't care less if the Ark was 3 cubic feet. As our motto goes: The Bible says it - that settles it.

Do I really need to say any more?

Indeed I am aware of that. We prefer to call it adaptation, but we'll also accept micro-evolution.

How about we call it just plain wrong?

Oh, really? Well, let me give you one of my oldies-but-goodies:


Explain the dinosaurs. Or alternatively, explain the complete and utter lack of dinosaurs in the bible.

Imagine that.

I guess you can't think of a reasonable argument against that. I can't blame you.

As I'm fond of saying: Where science disagrees with Scripture - science is wrong.

Yes, because the collective knowledge of millions of people over hundreds of years could never stand up to the knowledge of one guy, a couple of thousand years ago.

I guess the next time you, or someone close to you is seriously ill, the hospital is out of the question? After all, doesn't the scriptures teach us that God can heal the sick? Medicine is against God's will.
 
Upvote 0

Bombila

Veteran
Nov 28, 2006
3,474
445
✟28,256.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
At the end of all debates between YECs and everybody else, it comes down to: magic. If a Biblical event goes against all reason and nature, then it was caused by that ol' deifous magic. To which, of course, there is no rational answer except "I don't believe in magic", at which point, of course, an angel falls down dead somewhere, children.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Ahhh... So even though Coyotes are a different species to Wolves, they still evolved into them?

They all come from the Genus Canis, then branch out into their respective species - Lupis (wolves, dingos...and yes domestic dogs), Latrans (coyotes) etc...

Indeed they did.

You see, some argue that if micro-evolution occurs enough times, then you'll get an instance of macro-evolution. In other words, a species will eventually give rise to a new genera.

But the God we serve is a God of boundaries ---

[bible]Psalm 74:17[/bible]

--- and there are certain boundaries that nature just cannot cross.

As I've said before: nature is currently hostile to God's creation --- but obedient to God.
 
Upvote 0

Mockingbirdred

Active Member
Feb 5, 2008
68
4
41
Manchester
✟22,708.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Indeed they did.

You see, some argue that if micro-evolution occurs enough times, then you'll get an instance of macro-evolution. In other words, a species will eventually give rise to a new genera.

You can't give birth to an entirely new species. You could only ever give birth to a variety of the original species.

Two elephants couldn't give birth to a parrot.
 
Upvote 0

talkingmonkey

Active Member
Jan 21, 2008
144
18
Brisneyland
Visit site
✟22,871.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
So because someone ages ago said that the Earth's seasons cannot go into Space, then that is enough objective support to say that nature will not cross some of "God's" boundaries...as if all of nature has sentience and enough intelligence to conceptualise metaphors of modern language.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Do I really need to say any more?

It's your call, my friend.

Explain the dinosaurs. Or alternatively, explain the complete and utter lack of dinosaurs in the bible.

There is no complete and utter lack of dinosaurs in the Bible, as Job attests to. QV the Bible for Leviathan and Behemoth.

I guess the next time you, or someone close to you is seriously ill, the hospital is out of the question? After all, doesn't the scriptures teach us that God can heal the sick? Medicine is against God's will.

The next time I, or someone close to me is seriously ill, we'll go to our family doctor.

Let me quote Doctor Luke:

Luke 5:31 said:
And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.

Q: Who need a physician?
A: They that are sick.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
At the end of all debates between YECs and everybody else, it comes down to: magic.

I don't debate [Christian] YEC's; nor do I intend to on a public forum - (it's a sin).

And I strongly disagree with the term "magic" --- that's a cheap shot.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
Keep in mind that this was a supernatural event, planned and executed by God.

So Noah was essentially ballast.


As I tell others, the Bible was silent on how these "side issues" were handled; but we're not so ignorant of how God operates that we cannot formulate an intelligent hypothesis.

By all means, I would love to see an intelligent flood hypothesis presented.

All we have to do, for instance, is break down the Flood story into various scenarios, then see how God handled similar scenarios.

because God is nothing if not predictable.

I'm fond of saying that, in my opinion, there was a ninth Person on the Ark.

People are fond of saying that you're talking out of your hat. Funny thing, fond sayings, aren't they?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Let me ask you Agnostics a question that has bothered me since I've come here.

Why, if you're Agnostics, do you so strongly argue against what Christians believe?

I have, in almost two years now, never seen an Agnostic take on an Atheist.

And another thing: How long do you intend to stay Agnostics? Do you like the question mark logo or something?

I'm not afraid to take on the Atheists --- in fact, I eat them for breakfast.
 
Upvote 0

Naraoia

Apprentice Biologist
Sep 30, 2007
6,682
313
On edge
Visit site
✟30,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
You see, some argue that if micro-evolution occurs enough times, then you'll get an instance of macro-evolution. In other words, a species will eventually give rise to a new genera.
Isn't wheat a cross between two different genera? ^_^
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So because someone ages ago said that the Earth's seasons cannot go into Space, then that is enough objective support to say that nature will not cross some of "God's" boundaries...as if all of nature has sentience and enough intelligence to conceptualise metaphors of modern language.

Nature groans in pain --- awaiting the return of Christ.

[bible]Romans 8:19-22[/bible]
 
Upvote 0

Mockingbirdred

Active Member
Feb 5, 2008
68
4
41
Manchester
✟22,708.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Let me ask you Agnostics a question that has bothered me since I've come here.

Why, if you're Agnostics, do you so strongly argue against what Christians believe?

I have, in almost two years now, never seen an Agnostic take on an Atheist.

And another thing: How long do you intend to stay Agnostics? Do you like the question mark logo or something, or does hypocrisy just come naturally to you cowards?

I'm not afraid to take on the Atheists --- in fact, I eat them for breakfast.

I believe I stated in an earlier post that I considered myself atheist for a while, until I realised how stupid that really is.

This isn't an atheistic forum, so no, you probably wouldn't see too many agnostics take on atheists.

As it happens, whenever I've discussed the point with atheists as to whether there is or isn't a God, most of them concede that they don't know for definite, but a lot of evidence points towards there not being. This technically makes all atheists agnostic.

You see, I don't think of it as hypocrisy, or cowardice. I see it as being open minded, something which you will go to your grave having never experienced, my friend.

I argue so strongly against Christians because, as I stated in my first post here, I find they're the ones that are so pig-headed about their beliefs, and you have done absolutely nothing to dispel that belief.

"Where the scriptures and science disagree, science is wrong"

Could you be any more narrow minded?

As for how long I plan to stay agnostic, right up until someone proves to me one way or another that God exists. Until then, I'm willing to keep an open mind about it, like a rational, straight thinking human being.

Which is more than you will ever be able to say for yourself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheOutsider
Upvote 0

Naraoia

Apprentice Biologist
Sep 30, 2007
6,682
313
On edge
Visit site
✟30,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
And another thing: How long do you intend to stay Agnostics? Do you like the question mark logo or something, or does hypocrisy just come naturally to you cowards?
Why is agnosticism hypocrisy or cowardice?

How is "I don't know" or "I can't know" an inferior or less honest stance to "I think so" or "I don't think so"?

Note that, at least in these parts of the forums, agnostics and atheists are generally on the same side of the issue, be it Bible Is Truth vs Bible Is Myth Book, Goddidit vs Naturedidit or Creation vs Evolution or Bible vs Science. Because agnostics don't tend to be biblical literalists, and, by the very definition of the word, they don't claim to know anything certain about God - including his existence.

I'm not afraid to take on the Atheists --- in fact, I eat them for breakfast.
Not on this board, or not while I've been here :p
 
Upvote 0

talkingmonkey

Active Member
Jan 21, 2008
144
18
Brisneyland
Visit site
✟22,871.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Nature groans in pain --- awaiting the return of Christ.

[bible]Romans 8:19-22[/bible]


So now nature is a creature that was given hope as well as vanity by God?

Could the creature be the Economy instead?

That same Romans 8:19-22 quote still applies...

Perhaps it could be my bowel contents?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,391
52,710
Guam
✟5,176,453.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I believe I stated in an earlier post that I considered myself atheist for a while, until I realised how stupid that really is.

As I understand it, and I'm not trying to belittle anyone here, I'm just calling the shots as I see them.

But as I understand it, an agnostic is nothing more than an atheist without a backbone.
 
Upvote 0

Naraoia

Apprentice Biologist
Sep 30, 2007
6,682
313
On edge
Visit site
✟30,998.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
As it happens, whenever I've discussed the point with atheists as to whether there is or isn't a God, most of them concede that they don't know for definite, but a lot of evidence points towards there not being. This technically makes all atheists agnostic.
Yes, I guess the lines are rather blurred around weak atheism and agnosticism. I'm staying with the brain icon because I couldn't honestly claim to be sitting on the fence. Even though I don't hope we'll ever really know the answer, I think the vastly more probable answer is "no".

Until evidence comes and shows me otherwise, of course.
 
Upvote 0