The number one bugger for creationists: C

[aeroz19]

Read Mark 4:12 and 1 Kings 22:20-23

Please do not respond again until you do. I have quoted them in this thread for easy reading. They both indicate that God is more than willing to let you believe a lie.

Look at the account of Baalam and the talking donkey.

Which (talking Donkey's) by the way were actually extinct within a decade after the Cretacious period - invalidating scripture yet again. CHtongueEEK.

The earth is round, but beware, because this is a lie that God is letting us all believe because we are sooooooooooooo unGodly!!!!!!!

 

[Arikay]

Speaking of Darwin, not only was he a christian when he did his studies of evolution, he was a devoted christian, often quoting the bible as the final say in conversations.

Evolution did change his beliefs but it wasn't what made him agnostic.

 

[w81minit]

I can't allow that. Your response is without logic and doesn't even address the problem that was stated. But just in case it did, let me sum it up:

"But this leads to the problem that we are now seeing things that never existed"

"I am pointing out that the master of all creation can do as he pleases without the implication that he is deceiving us."

So, God can make the light to appear to show us things that never existed while not deceiving us?

My God is far more orderly and intelligent than that. I cannot accept your argument.

And what of the Kings reference? What of Jesus' parables? You are flat unwilling to believe in anything but science. You can't buy my argument irrespective of logic. You can't buy my argument because you prefer that the only explanation for God inputting age into a man is deception. Jesus miracles are therefore deception, because he violated natural law. Incarnation was deceptive, because he had a father that wasn't his father. He appeared as a man but he was God. He allowed Judas his betrayer to be with him when he knew all along how it would end. Wasn't he decieving Judas.
Just as I thought - if the evidence doesn't line up - change the dynamics of my theory.

Nuff said.

 

[Cantuar]

mhess, try this one:

Would God ask us not to use our minds to observe our surroundings and try to understand them? Would he make the universe look mature to laugh at the silly phycists who love finding out more about the world around them?

Why make the universe look mature and then give us the minds to try to understand it at the same time? Is he playing silly buggers with us?

Actually, many creationists would be quite happy to say that yes he is playing silly buggers with us, in order to take those arrogant atheistic scientists down a peg. And they'd quote the scripture about fools who think they're wise. All you need to do is to put your mind on hold and engage your emotions, and it'll all become clear.

 

[aeroz19]

Item Number One

1. God created the light at the beginning. However, they are insisting that the light we see today from distant celestial bodies is that light. There are problems with this beyond reason.

Ok, let's say that since God created all things with an appearance of "maturity": the earth, universe, plants, animals, and people were mature.

Does this imply that light was also mature? And what does that mean anyway? Light being mature? Mature light, a Creationist would say, is light that has been created everywhere at once.

Lets say that star A has been created. It's light is immediately being emitted, but God made light all over the universe in all places to appear as though it was coming from this star. So, on Earth, God created some rays of light that appeared to be coming in the direction of that star--a star that is millions of light years away. This gets somewhat complex!

Assuming that God made light rays all the way from the distant star to the earth, then what does that light show us? When the light reaches earth, do we see how it looked on Day 1 of creation until the light emitted from the star reaches us a million years later?

And what if a supernova occurs? Guess we'll have to wait until the created light all reaches us, and the regular light is emmitted, to see the supernova.

Wait, but we have already seen supernovas. How can this be?

This type of an explanation does not satisfy me. God never said He did anything like this.

Even the sites in the OP admit that item no. one is out of the picture:

"This would mean that for a 10,000-year-old universe, that anything we see happening beyond about 10,000 light-years away is actually part of a gigantic picture show of things that have not actually happened, showing us objects which may not even exist."

Item number one has been refuted.

 

[w81minit]

I am sure this was told to those who challenged the Church's view that the Bible indicates geocentrism.

You can't take a verse and slap it on those who you think are challenging your interpretation of the Bible.

Maybe what we think the Bible is telling us is wrong, like with Geocentrism. Maybe we need to be more open minded and consider whether or not our current interpretations are correct.

Please find something other than the Geocentrism crutch. Read the references for comprehension. I have proven that God will allow you to believe a lie. You are still clinging to the Romans reference which when placed into context actually refers to the gifts of the spirit and how they should be used.

I find no reason to continue this if you can't admit that God will allow you to believe a lie. Further without saying it in so many words, you are bearing out that my premise is true: all scripture when compared to man's revealed knowledge will ultimately wind up - what di Soph say? Irrelevant.
You are typing proof of that in every post.

 

[aeroz19]

Explanation: The closest and brightest supernova in over a decade was recorded just over a month ago in the outskirts of nearby galaxy NGC 2403. Officially tagged SN 2004dj, the Type IIP explosion likely annihilated most of a blue supergiant star as central fusion could no longer hold it up. The supernova can be seen as the bright object in the above image in the direction of the arrow. The home galaxy to the supernova, spiral galaxy NGC 2403, is located only 11 million light years away and is visible with binoculars toward the northern constellation of Camelopardalis (the Giraffe). The supernova is fading but still visible with a telescope, once peaking at just brighter than magnitude 12. Supernovas of this type change brightness in a predictable way and may be searched for in the distant universe as distance indicators.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

So, did this event occur 11 million years ago, or 6000 years ago, or more recently than 6000 years ago?

Lets say it occured 5000 years ago. How did that light reach us now, when it is so far away and light only travels at 300,000km/sec?


Distance to the supernova:
11 million light years
= 11 million of the units of distance that light travels in a year
= (11 million) of these --> (300,000km/sec)(60sec/min)(60min/hr)(24hrs/day)(365.25days/yr)
=(11 million) times (9.46726x10^12km/yr)
=1.0414008x10^20 km


Wow, that's over a trillion kilometers! Can someone please ckeck my numbers? Thanks. I am sensing that something is wrong with my data.


Now, if this event occured 5000 years ago, how do we explain how we saw it? Well, we could say that light traveled really fast, which means you have to prove that c has decayed and why.

Speed of c:
(1.0414008x10^20 km)/5000yrs
=(2.0828016x10^16 km/yr)(1 yr/31557600 sec)
=6.6x10^8 km/sec
=2200 times faster than c today.


This means that c is decaying at a rate of 131,940 km/sec per year, if you look at it in a linear manner. However, this would mean that we would have noticed the decay, since it is so obvious a decay.

Have I effecively killed item number 2

 

[w81minit]

Speaking of Darwin, not only was he a christian when he did his studies of evolution, he was a devoted christian, often quoting the bible as the final say in conversations.

Evolution did change his beliefs but it wasn't what made him agnostic.

Yep. We're pretty much all Christians that claim to be. Especially when our works don't match the faith.

Good point Arikay!

 

[Sopharos]

Yep. We're pretty much all Christians that claim to be. Especially when our works don't match the faith.

Good point Arikay!

So you're saying that Theistic Evolutions are not true Christians?

 

[w81minit]

Item Number One





Ok, let's say that since God created all things with an appearance of "maturity": the earth, universe, plants, animals, and people were mature.

Does this imply that light was also mature? And what does that mean anyway? Light being mature? Mature light, a Creationist would say, is light that has been created everywhere at once.

Lets say that star A has been created. It's light is immediately being emitted, but God made light all over the universe in all places to appear as though it was coming from this star. So, on Earth, God created some rays of light that appeared to be coming in the direction of that star--a star that is millions of light years away. This gets somewhat complex!

Assuming that God made light rays all the way from the distant star to the earth, then what does that light show us? When the light reaches earth, do we see how it looked on Day 1 of creation until the light emitted from the star reaches us a million years later?

And what if a supernova occurs? Guess we'll have to wait until the created light all reaches us, and the regular light is emmitted, to see the supernova.

Wait, but we have already seen supernovas. How can this be?

This type of an explanation does not satisfy me. God never said He did anything like this.

Even the sites in the OP admit that item no. one is out of the picture:

"This would mean that for a 10,000-year-old universe, that anything we see happening beyond about 10,000 light-years away is actually part of a gigantic picture show of things that have not actually happened, showing us objects which may not even exist."

Item number one has been refuted.

It has been refuted. You just refuse to believe that God would do what we say he did.
While I do not buy the argument that light had to move faster etc. I am saying God created - we are the beneficiaries. You want to take your scientific rules and bind them to God. I find that beyond reason.

 

[Philosoft]

I applaud your philanthropy: an Athiest standing up for something he doesn't believe in. How clever a dodge is that?

I decry you for your evasion. Here's the catch: so-called atheistic evolution and theistic evolution are, methodologically anyway, the same thing. In other words, I'm not taking up for theism, I'm taking up for evolution that theists also happen to accept.

 

[Mistermystery]

Aeroz: Great openings post

To the rest who say that God decieved us: Why isn't it in the bible then? "and He maketh the eartheth apeareth oldeth?" It makes no sense from any stand point that God would deliberatly make the world appear old if it's not. And besides, there is absolutly no evidence what so ever that the earth/universe is 6000 years old. None. Zip. Nada. Not even in the scripture there is solid evidence for this idea.

 

[w81minit]

So you're saying that Theistic Evolutions are not true Christians?

No - I am saying Hitler was not a Christian.
Nice divide and conquer scheme, but I'm on to ya doc.



I am not sure where you would have gotten that I assume Theistic Evolutionists are not Christian. I'll let God be the judge of that. Clearly; however, Hitler was no (shall we say) Mother Teresa?

 

[w81minit]

I decry you for your evasion. Here's the catch: so-called atheistic evolution and theistic evolution are, methodologically anyway, the same thing. In other words, I'm not taking up for theism, I'm taking up for evolution that theists also happen to accept.

I can accept that, but it is totally way past my bedtime. I will pick up this most enjoyable thread tomorrow.

 

[aeroz19]

And what of the Kings reference? What of Jesus' parables? You are flat unwilling to believe in anything but science. You can't buy my argument irrespective of logic. You can't buy my argument because you prefer that the only explanation for God inputting age into a man is deception. Jesus miracles are therefore deception, because he violated natural law.

This is your best argument yet. However, it doesn't pan out.

Jesus had an obvious reason for violating natural law. Jesus is God and can intervene when He wants. This was during the time of His ministry here on Earth. He was showing and proving to humans His divine powers. There would be no point in doing the same with creation, as we weren't there to see how He divinely violated His natural law. When Jesus did it on earth, everyone was there to see, and so believed who He was.

Why would He violate natural law in this manner? It would not show His divine powers, but rather a divine deception (addressing the issue of starlight as I understand it so far)

Incarnation was deceptive, because he had a father that wasn't his father. He appeared as a man but he was God. He allowed Judas his betrayer to be with him when he knew all along how it would end. Wasn't he decieving Judas.
Just as I thought - if the evidence doesn't line up - change the dynamics of my theory.

Nuff said.

See above.

 

[Mistermystery]

So, did this event occur 11 million years ago, or 6000 years ago, or more recently than 6000 years ago?

Lets say it occured 5000 years ago. How did that light reach us now, when it is so far away and light only travels at 300,000km/sec?


Distance to the supernova:
11 million light years
= 11 million of the units of distance that light travels in a year
= (11 million) of these --> (300,000km/sec)(60sec/min)(60min/hr)(24hrs/day)(365.25days/yr)
=(11 million) times (9.46726x10^12km/yr)
=1.0414008x10^20 km


Wow, that's over a trillion kilometers! Can someone please ckeck my numbers? Thanks. I am sensing that something is wrong with my data.


Now, if this event occured 5000 years ago, how do we explain how we saw it? Well, we could say that light traveled really fast, which means you have to prove that c has decayed and why.

Speed of c:
(1.0414008x10^20 km)/5000yrs
=(2.0828016x10^16 km/yr)(1 yr/31557600 sec)
=6.6x10^8 km/sec
=2200 times faster than c today.


This means that c is decaying at a rate of 131,940 km/sec per year, if you look at it in a linear manner. However, this would mean that we would have noticed the decay, since it is so obvious a decay.

Have I effecively killed item number 2?

A bit simplistic numbers but I think you're pretty on top on this one.

 

[Sopharos]

No - I am saying Hitler was not a Christian.
Nice divide and conquer scheme, but I'm on to ya doc.

Except Arikay's post which you replied to was not about Hitler at all. It was about Darwin. Darwin in that sense (as both a Christian and founder of the Theory of Evolution) was a Theistic Evolutionist. You replied:

Yep. We're pretty much all Christians that claim to be. Especially when our works don't match the faith.

Good point Arikay!

Which is suggesting that Christians who claim themselves to be Christians are not really Christians.

I am not sure where you would have gotten that I assume Theistic Evolutionists are not Christian. I'll let God be the judge of that. Clearly; however, Hitler was no (shall we say) Mother Teresa?

Shifting the goalposts. Arikay's post was about Darwin, not Hitler.

 

[Philosoft]

You just refuse to believe that God would do what we say he did.

And you refuse to believe that the fallible humans who wrote what they believed God had done might have been hopelessly out of their intellectual league.

You want to take your scientific rules and bind them to God. I find that beyond reason.

Because reason dictates you should bind semantics and syntax to God instead?

 

[aeroz19]

Yep. We're pretty much all Christians that claim to be. Especially when our works don't match the faith.

Good point Arikay!

Uh oh, bad bad bad! You messed up.

 

[Mistermystery]

What is the greater purpose here?

Areoz, explain to me, when you prove to a weak Christian the the Earth is not 6000 years old...then what? When you prove to them that the Bible can't be trusted then what? When you prove to them that science is the only way to heaven or at least the only way to explain what the Bible apparently leaves to faith, then what?

It means that your weak interpretation is wrong, not the bible.