What proof would you need?

[selfinflikted]

Blind Post:

The only way I can fathom, at least at this point in my life, that I could come to believe in 'creationism' is if I met god himself and I was shown that it was correct. Otherwise, I just don't see it happening.

 

[AV1611VET]

Blind Post:

The only way I can fathom, at least at this point in my life, that I could come to believe in 'creationism' is if I met god himself and I was shown that it was correct. Otherwise, I just don't see it happening.

After the Rapture, 'god himself' will show up and convince people of evolutionism -- not creationism.

Then, God, Himself, is going to show up and put an end to it, once and for all.

 

[selfinflikted]

After the Rapture, 'god himself' will show up and convince people of evolutionism -- not creationism.

Then, God, Himself, is going to show up and put an end to it, once and for all.

I'm sure I'll be long gone before that happens. In which case, I'm screwed anyway.

 

[Doveaman]

Blind Post:

The only way I can fathom, at least at this point in my life, that I could come to believe in 'creationism' is if I met god himself and I was shown that it was correct. Otherwise, I just don't see it happening.

All Christians have met God and have been shown that He did in fact create the universe.

Not to worry, you too will meet Him soon enough.

 

[selfinflikted]

All Christians have met God and have been shown that He did in fact create the universe.

I don't believe you.

Not to worry, you too will meet Him soon enough.

Why do Christians always resort to this threat? Is this supposed to 'scare' me into believing?

NEWSFLASH: It don't work.

 

[Doveaman]

you require that they keep the same explanation no matter what.

Yes, that way they would appear as if they are telling the truth because truth remains the same, no matter what.

 

[selfinflikted]

because truth remains the same, no matter what.

Except when it doesn't.

 

[Orogeny]

Yes, that way they would appear as if they are telling the truth because truth remains the same, no matter what.

This is utterly ridiculous. Truth changes on a daily basis.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why do Christians always resort to this threat?

Why do you deem this a threat?

Especially after you just said this:

The only way I can fathom, at least at this point in my life, that I could come to believe in 'creationism' is if I met god himself and I was shown that it was correct. Otherwise, I just don't see it happening.

Is there something you know deep down inside that you're not telling us?

 

[selfinflikted]

Why do you deem this a threat?

Especially after you just said this:

Is there something you know deep down inside that you're not telling us?

Oh come on. Even you can hear the DUN DUN DUUUNNNN! orchestral fanfare at the end of, "Don't worry.. you'll meet him soon enough! MWAHAHAHA!"

 

[Doveaman]

I find it strange that creationists know nothing about evolution and refuse to answer questions about creationism.

Creationists have been answering questions about creationism long before you were born, newbie

So what are you all doing here? I know, you're trying to prove that evolution is wrong and failing miserably,
is that frustrating or what?

Many creationists come here convinced evolution theory is folly. After listening to you guys they leave here even more convinced evolution theory is folly.

In case you're wondering... evolution doesn't care what you, me or Donald Duck thinks because it's going to carry on doing it's thing no matter what.

Donald Duck did not evolve, he was created by intelligent design, and he doesn't care what you think.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes, that way they would appear as if they are telling the truth because truth remains the same, no matter what.

I have always found that those claiming to know the truth are the ones who are furthest away from the truth. Our knowledge will always be imperfect. The best we can do is construct models that are testable and falsifiable, two things that creationism lacks.

Also, if the Bible contains the truth as to the Earth's age then why are creationists 4 billion years apart on the age of the Earth?

 

[Loudmouth]

Creationists have been answering questions about creationism long before you were born, newbie

Those answers are now on AiG's list of arguments creationists should not use.

Many creationists come here convinced evolution theory is folly. After listening to you guys they leave here even more convinced evolution theory is folly.

So what evidence would it take to change your mind, or is that possible?

 

[Doveaman]

This is utterly ridiculous. Truth changes on a daily basis.

Such as?

 

[Loudmouth]

All Christians have met God and have been shown that He did in fact create the universe.

That would explain why there are so many theistic evolutionists out there.

 

[Loudmouth]

You lot cannot go on with pride in your evidence for evolution if you are unable to explain one important query. My point is established. You lot can woffle on and on without any substance or understanding of your own quasy evidence for human ancestry.

These are just details. The evolutionist position has never changed as to humans and chimps sharing a common ancestor. It is as stable as creationism ever was in this regard. Whether or not our common ancestor was bipedal or not does not change the evidence that there was a common ancestor. It also does not change the transitional nature of the fossils. Scientists made a very human mistake in thinking that human bipedality was somehow special to us. They were wrong. When the evidence in the fossil record started coming out their mistakes were shown. As it turns out, our common ancestor was more bipedal than we first expected. You somehow cite this as a mark against science, in that it is capable of changing its mind in the face of new evidence. I guess you expect everyone to be as dogmatic as you. That is not the case.

So what features must a fossil have in order for you to accept it as transitional? Or do you reject every fossil a priori without ever looking at it?

Your entire evolutionary science is based on a fraudulent misrepresentation of both the fossil and genomic evidence.

The only fraud is your presentation of it. You try to claim that entire species are built from a single bone. This is untrue. You then turn around and construct an entire species from footprints.

Your evo scientists should be ashamed of themselves and pack up and get the heck out of laboratories taking their ridiculous algorithms and mythical extrapolations of facts into fiction with them.

All bluster and no substance, as usual. Do you even realize what a substantive argument is?

 

[Loudmouth]

Such as?

Such as the Bible saying the Sun moves about the Earth one day, and then the very opposite the other.

Further on [Bellarmine] says that interpreting heliocentrism as physically real would be "a very dangerous thing, likely not only to irritate all scholastic philosophers and theologians, but also to harm the Holy Faith by rendering Holy Scripture as false."
Galileo affair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh come on. Even you can hear the DUN DUN DUUUNNNN! orchestral fanfare at the end of, "Don't worry.. you'll meet him soon enough! MWAHAHAHA!"

That's not my style, my friend -- I pray your meeting will be more of a 'welcome home,' than a 'wrong address.'

 

[Orogeny]

Such as?

Such as nearly every event that happens every day? This morning, I was really hungry. That was the truth. I had a large meal, so I'm no longer hungry. Now THAT is the truth. Last week it was true that Lynn Margulis was a geosciences prof at UMass Amherst. Now the truth is that she's dead (RIP).

Truth changes every day, and so should our understanding of the truth.

 

[Doveaman]

I have always found that those claiming to know the truth are the ones who are furthest away from the truth.

What is truth?

Our knowledge will always be imperfect.

No kidding.

The best we can do is construct models that are testable and falsifiable

That's unfortunate. No wonder you guys can hardly claim anything to be true.

two things that creationism lacks.

You don't expect us to replace truth with a mere theory, do you?

Creationism is based on these truths:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground...From one man He made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth...at the beginning of creation God made them male and female. (Gen 1:1, 2:7, Acts 17:26, Mark 10:6).

Also, if the Bible contains the truth as to the Earth's age then why are creationists 4 billion years apart on the age of the Earth?

The Bible does not contain the age of the earth. It contain truths (facts) from which we form theories about the age of the earth. The theories may differ, but the truths remains the same, no matter what.