• 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.

The number one bugger for creationists: C

w81minit

Active Member
Sep 1, 2004
368
4
✟528.00
Faith
Christian
Sopharos said:
Except Arikay's post which you replied to was not about Hitler at all. It was about Darwin. Darwin in that sense was a Theistic Evolutionist. You replied:



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



Shifting the goalposts. Arikay's post was about Darwin, not Hitler.
Good point. I was sure she was responding to the Hitler reference; however I am not above being incorrect. I have been typing and reading so fast a couple of posts must have ran together. No offense to TE's. Hitler (though he claimed to be Christian was clearly not one. TE's, it is not up to me to judge that - but I will say we should each examine ourselves daily where we stand, as it says (I think in Timothy) Work out your salvation .... meaning we need to continually match our words and actions with our savior's.
 
Upvote 0

Sopharos

My big fat tongue in my plump pink cheek
May 16, 2004
1,245
77
Nah nah nah-nah nah! I'm HERE and you're NOT!!!
✟1,739.00
Faith
Other Religion
w81minit said:
Good point. I was sure she was responding to the Hitler reference; however I am not above being incorrect. I have been typing and reading so fast a couple of posts must have ran together. No offense to TE's. Hitler (though he claimed to be Christian was clearly not one. TE's, it is not up to me to judge that - but I will say we should each examine ourselves daily where we stand, as it says (I think in Timothy) Work out your salvation .... meaning we need to continually match our words and actions with our savior's.

That's better. I was simply pointing out a fallacy. However, Evolution has nothing to do with Salvation either.
 
Upvote 0

Mistermystery

Here's looking at you kid
Apr 19, 2004
4,220
169
✟5,275.00
Faith
Atheist
Mistermystery said:
A bit simplistic numbers but I think you're pretty on top on this one.
One more thing: If God created the light *en route* that must mean that the explosion never happend! Why is God lieing to us by showing us things that are not there? See also this thread I made a while ago. While it many lacks fun math-equasions as yours has, it still makes the point across :)
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
42
Visit site
✟36,317.00
Faith
Taoist
"You just refuse to believe that God would do what we say he did."

Unless you are jesus, maybe you are wrong.
Nah, I forget, creationists are infallible when it comes to reading the bible. (or so say most creationist groups).

w81minit said:
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.
 
Upvote 0

w81minit

Active Member
Sep 1, 2004
368
4
✟528.00
Faith
Christian
Sopharos said:
That's better. I was simply pointing out a fallacy. However, Evolution has nothing to do with Salvation either.
Bzzzzzzttt.... Awe mom, time for school already?

I have got to get some sleep.

Nice debate - May the fullness of our words never be so burdensome that we lack desire to retrieve them yet again from the dungheap to recycle them and pass them off as wisdom.
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
bevets said:
Orthodox Christian doctrine maintains that the Bible is Reality and man is fallible.


That's right; your interpretation of the Bible could be wrong, because you are fallible!






My interpretation is fallible. Please explain why your interpretaton is better.
Because maybe mine is supported by science.
 
Upvote 0

w81minit

Active Member
Sep 1, 2004
368
4
✟528.00
Faith
Christian
Arikay said:
"You just refuse to believe that God would do what we say he did."

Unless you are jesus, maybe you are wrong.
Nah, I forget, creationists are infallible when it comes to reading the bible. (or so say most creationist groups).
Don't assume on a work you have little knowledge of. I do not assume I understand science to the degree that TE's or AE's, but I know scripture, because it is the foundation. I would say that would lead me to be in a slightly more advantageous position for understanding his ways. It astounds me that you would prefer those that do not follow it's teachings to be on equal par in its exegesis as those that do. Your claim of what God might have done shouldn't come from some mystical feeling about which there is no basis for comparison. Instead it should come from careful consideration of the text left gleen of his ways. If God wants anything it is for us to know him. We wont find him in the fossil record. I argue it will be in the law, the prophets, and in Jesus teachings, and the word wich he gave us.
-JMHO
 
Upvote 0

Philosoft

Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
Dec 26, 2002
5,427
188
52
Southeast of Disorder
Visit site
✟6,503.00
Faith
Atheist
w81minit said:
Yeah, Silly. Science trumps careful study of the bible.
Your ego is showing again. I daresay, you can hardly claim a terribly "careful study of the Bible" if you can't even square it with what is, empirically, gob-smackingly apparent; the methods used by the various sciences are repeatable, reliable, and available to all who would deign to engage them. Ignorance is, ultimately, no excuse in this case.
 
Upvote 0

w81minit

Active Member
Sep 1, 2004
368
4
✟528.00
Faith
Christian
aeroz19 said:
You haven't established that what you believe is true, other than "Well this is how I interpret it, and I am absolutely right, and need no proof to back it up!"
Completely disengenuous, argumentative, and without real merit for learning. Snipe aside, I think if you read my posts you will see exactly where I'm coming from. Now, on the other hand, if you've decided to pick and choose what to read and respond to, it is no wonder why you are confused about what I speak.

That said if you want to know, just ask.
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
w81minit said:
Completely disengenuous, argumentative, and without real merit for learning. Snipe aside, I think if you read my posts you will see exactly where I'm coming from. Now, on the other hand, if you've decided to pick and choose what to read and respond to, it is no wonder why you are confused about what I speak.

That said if you want to know, just ask.
Actually, I have read every single one of your posts and know exactly where you stand. In fact, I am still on page 18.
 
Upvote 0

Arikay

HI
Jan 23, 2003
12,674
207
42
Visit site
✟36,317.00
Faith
Taoist
What am I assuming?
Creationist groups claim to have pretty much perfect reading of the bible.

So I assume that you don't believe creationism to be valid science?

Tell me, who has a better understanding of Gods words, someone who reads the bible and interprets it themselves, or someone who uses Gods creation to guide them?



w81minit said:
Don't assume on a work you have little knowledge of. I do not assume I understand science to the degree that TE's or AE's, but I know scripture, because it is the foundation. I would say that would lead me to be in a slightly more advantageous position for understanding his ways. It astounds me that you would prefer those that do not follow it's teachings to be on equal par in its exegesis as those that do. Your claim of what God might have done shouldn't come from some mystical feeling about which there is no basis for comparison. Instead it should come from careful consideration of the text left gleen of his ways. If God wants anything it is for us to know him. We wont find him in the fossil record. I argue it will be in the law, the prophets, and in Jesus teachings, and the word wich he gave us.
-JMHO
 
Upvote 0
A

aeroz19

Guest
Jet Black said:
again deception. what is "mature"? why would trees be created with rings indicating that they are older than they are. would adam have been created with a scar on his leg from a childhood accident he never had? did adam have a naval? again the appearance of age argument is deceptive, you don't want a deceptive God do you?
Trees with rings. Another intellectual difficulty.
 
Upvote 0