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.
I'd have to have an acceptable form of proof. The Bible, being of unverifiable authorship, is not acceptable.
If God embedded age into the world, and gave you an acceptable form of proof, would that render your conclusion false?
I guess you can't reason a person out of a position they did not reason themselves into, can you?
If God embedded age into the world, and gave you an acceptable form of proof, would that render your conclusion false?
Then I encourage you to read a post I wrote to this forum on Ernst Haeckel & Embryology. After that, perhaps you could answer my challenge to you in the OP?I brought up Haeckel's drawings because that's what I guessed he was talking about. I find it sad that you will still find his drawings in some textbooks today.
Which Bible?
If God embedded age into the world, and gave you an acceptable form of proof, would that render your conclusion false?
That is a really interesting question! No joke!
If God embedded age in the earth, in other words if God made the earth to LOOK like it was older than it actually is, the only proof he could provide would be absolute proof of his own existence (and then he'd have to make an embedded age-containing object for me).
At this point I'd say "Aha! A trickster god! This is not a god who should be worshipped because he is inherently a liar. I will not worship this god as he is deceitful."
If you do worship this trickster god after knowing full-well that he is a trickster, then how do you differentiate yourself from a satanist?
You have collapsed all the paradox of god, the euthyphro dilemma is solved immediately (whatever god does is good, so tomorrow he could decree mass murder "good" and you would have no choice but to do it). The Ontological argument would be rendered pointless (for instance, now I could conceive of a being who apart from being than which none greater can be conceived, one which values TRUTH, and that would make the trickster god either null and void --thus eliminating the proof you just got-- or would render the Ontological Argument invalid since the god of the OA is nothing like this god.
Interesting where that would lead....
The Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic Bible. All others are translations. The King James is the best English translation of the Old Testament. The NIV is considered the best for the New Testament.
No way is the KJV this best translation of the bible, its a horrible limited translation of a limited group of texts, the only reason i find people like the KJV is because it perpetulates beliefs that are later found to be false from better texts, but they want to believe those beliefs dispite them being wrong in later tranlationsThe Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic Bible. All others are translations. The King James is the best English translation of the Old Testament. The NIV is considered the best for the New Testament.
No way is the KJV this best translation of the bible, its a horrible limited translation of a limited group of texts, the only reason i find people like the KJV is because it perpetulates beliefs that are later found to be false from better texts, but they want to believe those beliefs dispite them being wrong in later tranlations
The NIV is better but the translaters bowed to pressure from pro-lifers and corrupted the text they translated
there is no bible, its a collection of many texts written over a long course of time, only people who want to believe its one text when its obvious its not, believe this.
this from one who abveiously knows nothing of scripture. We who you say speak of science or the theory as such are ridiculd but for some reason you all seem to KNOW everything and understand it all just fine. We who are not evolutionst dont understand it and are ignorant liers YET YET those who are not christians DO KNOW all thee is about the bible and what it states. TYPICAL bla bla bla....a lack of understanding science? A lack of appreciation for logic? A lack of insight? A lack of appreciation for the countless philosophers who have come before? A surplus of hubris and pride in their own flawed misunderstanding?
Yeah, sure if it doesn't actually say what it says.
Are you a protestant? Or do you cleave to Catholic church as it was originally founded. Are you justified by faith or works? Are you a trinitarian or a adoptionist? Are you a Docetist?
Are you an albigensian?
In case you aren't following these are all competing interpretations that hit at the fundamentals of your faith. Let's look at how the reasoned "faith" dealt with Albigensians. Since clearly a heresy, the faith need only point out the obvious error. Guess that's why it took a 20 year military campaign and a lot of people being killed and burned.
Yes the faith is ever constant. Unchanging and never altered. That's why everyone today is a Catholic.
(I wish along with science classes, creationists would also take some history classes)
I'm partial to the older RSV, which doesn't seem to be much in favor any more.
and then two Christians responded with:What if God embedded age into His creation? Would that be an accurate conclusion, then?
I don't believe in this and I would never believe this.
No, because it requires us to believe that God embedded deception into the earth.
No, because you'd still come to the conclusion that God purposely is deceiving us.
Why is it difficult to believe that God did something He said?You'd still have to prove that God actuall said such a thing, as opposed to you or some other person.
this from one who abveiously knows nothing of scripture.
We who you say speak of science or the theory as such are ridiculd. but for some reason you all seem to KNOW everything and understand it all just fine.
Yes. Now for the proof part, if you don't mind.If God embedded age into the world, and gave you an acceptable form of proof, would that render your conclusion false?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?