Why do YE Creationists insist on a simplistic literal reading of the bible?

[BrianJK]

Some of the objective evidence is based on science, not all and virtually none of the circumstantial evidence is based on scientific dating systems.

Do you have evidence you can share, that scientific dating systems (of the age of earth, universe, etc.) is wrong? If you do please share. Otherwise, you are discounting a proven scientific method, simply because it goes against a book written centuries ago. May be a logical choice for you, but not for me.

Overall, the christian story and explanation of what God is, does not align with the reality of the world we live in. Christians try so very hard, to rationalize an explanation, but this world is not the work of an; all powerful, all loving, all caring, omnipotent being. You can try all day to put the round peg in a square hole to make the christian God work, but the contradictions are overwhelming and clear for all to see.

If God's morality doesn't align with your own and you believe the dating system science uses is "proven", then that is your opinion, but not a universal truth.

 

[bhsmte]

If God's morality doesn't align with your own and you believe the dating system science uses is "proven", then that is your opinion, but not a universal truth.

What does this discussion have to do with God's morality?

I have this habit, of leaning towards putting more credibility in things that have a legitimate measure of verifiability to them. I think its a good habit and believe it has merit.

 

[BrianJK]

What does this discussion have to do with God's morality?

I have this habit, of leaning towards putting more credibility in things that have a legitimate measure of verifiability to them. I think its a good habit and believe it has merit.

You think that God wouldn't allow certain things to happen and that is somehow evidence against Him.

 

[bhsmte]

You think that God wouldn't allow certain things to happen and that is somehow evidence against Him.

The God of the bible does not align with the reality of the world we live in.

Thankfully though, when we talk about God's morality, we don't have people getting stoned to death, virgins raped and then the rapist just needing to pay a fee to the father, slavery still in existence etc. etc. etc..

 

[Mr Strawberry]

If God's morality doesn't align with your own...

God's morality? Now there's a can of worms for you. The most unpleasant character in all of fiction, as Dawkins called him, and, given god's zest for murder in the bible, it's a difficult assessment to argue with. Does this character's morality align with anyone's?

 

[Loudmouth]

If God's morality doesn't align with your own and you believe the dating system science uses is "proven", then that is your opinion, but not a universal truth.

So what geologic feature would disprove a literal Genesis in your eyes? What evidence would you have to see in order to admit that the evidence does not line up with a literal Genesis?

 

[Loudmouth]

You think that God wouldn't allow certain things to happen and that is somehow evidence against Him.

Would God purposefully make the world look old just to fool us?

 

[BrianJK]

So what geologic feature would disprove a literal Genesis in your eyes? What evidence would you have to see in order to admit that the evidence does not line up with a literal Genesis?

There is none. There is only "proof" to people looking for reasons to disbelieve.

 

[bhsmte]

There is none. There is only "proof" to people looking for reasons to disbelieve.

You have blinders on in the narrow manner in which you are looking at this. Why have you cornered yourself into thinking those that seek evidence (proof) are looking for reasons to disbelieve?

Did it ever occur to you, they may be seeking the truth, by using logic and evidence?

If you were on a jury in a murder case, how would you go about determining how you would come down with your verdict? If there was proof the defendant was innocent, would you accept that proof in that circumstance?

 

[BrianJK]

You have blinders on in the narrow manner in which you are looking at this. Why have you cornered yourself into thinking those that seek evidence (proof) are looking for reasons to disbelieve?

Did it ever occur to you, they may be seeking the truth, by using logic and evidence?

If you were on a jury in a murder case, how would you go about determining how you would come down with your verdict? If there was proof the defendant was innocent, would you accept that proof in that circumstance?

This is assuming there is a case... but I already have the Truth. You feel the need to "test" everything by trying to "disprove" it, but you use irrelevant standards. If I was trying a case, I wouldn't use a different nation's laws.

 

[bhsmte]

This is assuming there is a case... but I already have the Truth. You feel the need to "test" everything by trying to "disprove" it, but you use irrelevant standards. If I was trying a case, I wouldn't use a different nation's laws.

So, you don't care to test things to verify truth, you just take someone's word for it?

If I was in sales, I would want to knock on your door.

By the way, what irrelevant standards are you referring to?

 

[BrianJK]

So, you don't care to test things to verify truth, you just take someone's word for it?

If I was in sales, I would want to knock on your door.

By the way, what irrelevant standards are you referring to?

Those would be the standards of science which you hold so high. Things like the theory that something is hundreds of thousands of years old or even older and using that theory as the base standard to say the Bible is somehow wrong. It's only "wrong" if you believe the dating systems you're using as your standard. This applies to most situations where you apply science which you take by faith to something that says that science is wrong. How about things like your personal standard for what God should be or should do.

 

[lasthero]

It's only "wrong" if you believe the dating systems you're using as your standard.

What's wrong with the dating systems?

 

[BrianJK]

They see something God created several thousand years ago and call it billions of years old. Wonder how they calibrated that.

 

[bhsmte]

Those would be the standards of science which you hold so high. Things like the theory that something is hundreds of thousands of years old or even older and using that theory as the base standard to say the Bible is somehow wrong. It's only "wrong" if you believe the dating systems you're using as your standard. This applies to most situations where you apply science which you take by faith to something that says that science is wrong. How about things like your personal standard for what God should be or should do.

Well, I don't believe the God of the bible is real and much of that is based on the bible itself, so my standard of God is not relevant.

Again, if you claim certain scientific standards or methods are wrong, what evidence do you have to make that claim?

 

[lasthero]

They see something God created several thousand years ago and call it billions of years old. Wonder how they calibrated that.

That depends. Which dating techniques are you referring to, specifically?

 

[freezerman2000]

Brian,please write down the ENTIRE history of the earth(including the past epochs and dinosaurs)so that it fits into 6000 years and how it scientifically contradicts the natural evidence.
For our benefit.
Give your beliefs scientific credence.
No mention of Genesis,please.

 

[AV1611VET]

Brian,please write down the ENTIRE history of the earth(including the past epochs and dinosaurs)so that it fits into 6000 years and how it scientifically contradicts the natural evidence.
For our benefit.
Give your beliefs scientific credence.
No mention of Genesis,please.

... Why is your avatar smiling with a nail in his foot?

 

[freezerman2000]

Because I'm a fan of the Greatful Dead?

 

[freezerman2000]

How ya been,AV?