What Makes Creationism a Valid Scientific Alternative?

[AV1611VET]

No I'm implying that we have claims of eyewitnesses, with no eyewitness accounts.

The claims of eyewitnesses are in the autographs, are they not?

Luke 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luke 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

Since we don't have the autographs, but we have copies of them (called Scripture), are you implying Luke didn't say that?

And if he didn't, then God must have let them get Arab-phoned.

So either Luke is right, or the copies are wrong; which is it?

 

[46AND2]

The claims of eyewitnesses are in the autographs, are they not?

Luke 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luke 1:2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

Since we don't have the autographs, but we have copies of them (called Scripture), are you implying Luke didn't say that?

And if he didn't, then God must have let them get Arab-phoned.

So either Luke is right, or the copies are wrong; which is it?

Luke was not an eyewitness. Therefore, his account is second hand. That is the point.

 

[AV1611VET]

Luke was not an eyewitness. Therefore, his account is second hand. That is the point.

Luke 1:2 says he was, though.

If Luke didn't write Luke 1:2, who did?

 

[46AND2]

Luke 1:2 says he was, though.

No it doesn't.

 

[RickG]

Luke 1:2 says he was, though.

If Luke didn't write Luke 1:2, who did?

All the Gospels, including Luke are said to have been written a generation or more after Jesus' death.

 

[RickG]

Global warming and evolution are two prime examples where science is tainted by politics. I would like to see statistics comparing grants to our liberal public universities for studies supporting one side or another of these issues. Follow the money.

Almost the entire opposition to evolution and global warming comes from outside the scientific community. In other words, people with an agenda, not legitimate scientific sources. It is not just your so called "liberal public universities" that perform and publish their research, but the entire global scientific community. And yeah, follow the money, especially with global warming, its the people who have the most to lose, the petrochemical companies, especially the Koch brothers.

 

[AV1611VET]

All the Gospels, including Luke are said to have been written a generation or more after Jesus' death.

I'm not surprised, but the notes in the Rainbow Study Bible says Luke was written between AD 58 - 70.

You believe who you want, and I'll do the same.

 

[verysincere]

I'm not surprised, but the notes in the Rainbow Study Bible....

Amazing. Even the Rev. Jesse Jackson has published his own study Bible.

(I'll pass on that one.)

.

 

[AV1611VET]

Amazing. Even the Rev. Jesse Jackson has published his own study Bible.

(I'll pass on that one.)

Did I use the wrong Bible?

Here ... I'll use some others:

Life Application Bible = about AD 60.

Scofield Reference Bible = the date of Luke falls between AD 63 and AD 68.

Defender's Study Bible = Luke was written sometime around 60 AD.

RickG = All the Gospels, including Luke are said to have been written a generation or more after Jesus' death.

Choose ye this day whom ye will believe; as for me and my house, we will believe the notes.

 

[verysincere]

Did I use the wrong Bible?

I couldn't resist the wordplay on Jackson's "Rainbow Coalition", so I figured I would assign the trademark accordingly.

 

[AV1611VET]

I couldn't resist the wordplay on Jackson's "Rainbow Coalition", so I figured I would assign the trademark accordingly.

Yes, I caught that.

(I was, however, expecting a reference to another group that makes use of the rainbow. )

 

[46AND2]

I'm not surprised, but the notes in the Rainbow Study Bible says Luke was written between AD 58 - 70.

You believe who you want, and I'll do the same.

You have a study Bible that claims Luke 1:2 says that Luke is claiming to be an eyewitness? Every one I have ever seen says that Luke 1:1-4 indicates he is differentiating himself from eyewitness testimony.

 

[46AND2]

Did I use the wrong Bible?

Here ... I'll use some others:

Life Application Bible = about AD 60.

Scofield Reference Bible = the date of Luke falls between AD 63 and AD 68.

Defender's Study Bible = Luke was written sometime around 60 AD.

RickG = All the Gospels, including Luke are said to have been written a generation or more after Jesus' death.

Choose ye this day whom ye will believe; as for me and my house, we will believe the notes.

How does this contradict what Rick said? Human generations are typically listed at 20-30 years. You actually seem to be agreeing with Rick.

 

[RickG]

I'm not surprised, but the notes in the Rainbow Study Bible says Luke was written between AD 58 - 70.

You believe who you want, and I'll do the same.

Aren't you saying the same thing I did.

 

[Jamin4422]

Almost the entire opposition to evolution and global warming comes from outside the scientific community.

It is a little bit after the fact now. NY has already been flooded from storm surge. How are they going oppose something that has already happened. What are they going to do say ok New Orleans and New York flooded but Shanghi has not flooded yet so you do not have proof positive.

 

[AV1611VET]

All the Gospels, including Luke are said to have been written a generation or more after Jesus' death.

If by "generation," you mean 20-30 years after the death of Jesus, then I will agree. It's a rather strange way of putting it, but I suspect you're making it sound that way to mitigate the weight of their testimonies.

Matthew and John were most certainly with Jesus during His advent on the earth, and to say it was a generation after His death is ... well ... strange.

 

[RickG]

If by "generation," you mean 20-30 years after the death of Jesus, then I will agree. It's a rather strange way of putting it, but I suspect you're making it sound that way to mitigate the weight of their testimonies.

Matthew and John were most certainly with Jesus during His advent on the earth, and to say it was a generation after His death is ... well ... strange.

Are you saying the Gospels were written by the disciples that were with Jesus? A simple yes or no will do.

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you saying the Gospels were written by the disciples that were with Jesus? A simple yes or no will do.

Matthew = yes

John Boanerges = yes

John Mark = possibly (if he was one of the 70 or the 120)

Luke = possibly (if he was one of the 70 or the 120)

 

[RickG]

Matthew = yes

John Boanerges = yes

John Mark = possibly (if he was one of the 70 or the 120)

Luke = possibly (if he was one of the 70 or the 120)

My opinion is of no consequence, but I think I will go along with the consensus of most modern biblical scholars disagree who with you.

 

[AV1611VET]

My opinion is of no consequence, but I think I will go along with the consensus of most modern biblical scholars disagree who with you.

You do that ... and I'll stick with the old paths.