Why would....?

[Jimmy The Hand]

six days does work just fine.


Except for the zero evidence thing.

 

[ikester7579]

six days does work just fine.


Except for the zero evidence thing.

Why does a spiriual God need physical evidence?

 

[Jimmy The Hand]

He doesn't.

But that's faith.

Not science.

And there's the little rub that all the physical evidence that does exist contradicts a six day creation.

 

[ikester7579]

The famous quote of all who choose not to have faith. Ever thought that the old looking stuff was a by-product of quick creation? That God created all the elements that normally take millions of years to form Just for creation. And because He has the ability to do this is why He did it to show His awesome power and that time has no affect on Him. But then again, that would be to easy for science to understand.

 

[Jimmy The Hand]

A. There is no evidence of this. It's a leap of that nasty old thing called faith.

B. It would be deception which my good ol' baptist upbringing told me was bearing false witness.

C. An omnipotent being could have created us thirty seconds ago and implanted all our memories including my fifty some odd posts. Omnipotence is very convenient to explain away things ( like physical evidence ) that you don't really care for.

 

[ikester7579]

LOL, more of the old arguements? It's just like circular reasoning. God's word has been around longer than any of sciences theories.
And your starting to sound like you believe there's a Matrix. Yes Jimmy, their out to get us and control us. Soon they'll suck our brains out! LOL

 

[Pete Harcoff]

The famous quote of all who choose not to have faith. Ever thought that the old looking stuff was a by-product of quick creation? That God created all the elements that normally take millions of years to form Just for creation. And because He has the ability to do this is why He did it to show His awesome power and that time has no affect on Him. But then again, that would be to easy for science to understand.

But we can't use science to determine this, since science is limited to the natural. The conclusions we base on scientific reasoning are limited in this fashion.

By the same token I could argue that everything in the universe is merely a byproduct of Bimbleschnup the Jello Pixie's jello-based creative process. Doesn't matter that there's no evidence to support this, since Bimbleschnup is an omnipotent being with unlimited power that could've done it anyway Bimbleschnup wanted. It just happens that Bimbleschnup used jello.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

LOL, more of the old arguements?

ikester, whether or not they're old, they're still valid arguments.

Based on science alone, how do you distinguish between a universe created by Bimbleschnup the Jello Pixie and God?

 

[Jimmy The Hand]

I don't know where you get that I am a conspiracy nut.

You are the one that says that God planted the idea of "old stuff" to show us his magnificence.

Even though there is never any mention of this in God's word.

I ain't the one that took the blue pill.

 

[Hydra009]

LOL, more of the old arguements? It's just like circular reasoning. God's word has been around longer than any of sciences theories.

Listen to yourself, you're not even addressing Jimmy's points. If God created the world 6,000 years ago, why would he intentionally trick his children by making his creation seem many billions of years older than it actually is? Is it more reasonable that God is tricking us in his creation or that some of his followers may have misinterpreted the Bible?

 

[ikester7579]

Listen to yourself, you're not even addressing Jimmy's points. If God created the world 6,000 years ago, why would he intentionally trick his children by making his creation seem many billions of years older than it actually is? Is it more reasonable that God is tricking us in his creation or that some of his followers may have misinterpreted the Bible?

There's no trick to it. Science just refuses to look at anything that supports God.
How long has science been building the evolution and old earth theory? All that work down the toliet if God were proven. So do you think science will ever go in that direction and answer to why this other thing was even considered? Nope. It's one thing to support an untruth, it is quite another to have to explain why the untruth was told and taught to millions. The search for evidence of God by science will never happen. Only all the evidence that keeps God and his followers at bay. And why would God allow this? Because the true God always allows choices. He does not force His views upon others.

 

[ForeRunner]

You know... it is really interesting what people are willing to ignore because the obvious scares them.

And yes ikster, I am reffering to you.

 

[ikester7579]

LOL your so funny. I'm actually glad you post here. You brighten my day. Keep up the funny stuff. It makes me come back for more.

 

[Chobo Char]

Because the true God always allows choices. He does not force His views upon others.

Nah, he just sends them to the universe's biggest barbeque.

 

[Data]

There's no trick to it. Science just refuses to look at anything that supports God.

?

What supports God?

How long has science been building the evolution and old earth theory?

Christians began both, and science was originally made by christians.

All that work down the toliet if God were proven.

Or not, seeing as there is such thing as 'theistic evolution'.

So do you think science will ever go in that direction and answer to why this other thing was even considered? Nope. It's one thing to support an untruth, it is quite another to have to explain why the untruth was told and taught to millions. The search for evidence of God by science will never happen. Only all the evidence that keeps God and his followers at bay.

What evidence?

Have you ever supposed that their may be no evidence?

Feel free to look for evidence yourself. Nothing's stopping you. 'Science' isn't an evil atheist conglomerate, find some evidence for god, science will beleive you. It just happens that science is largely christian itself.

But, there you have it. You don't have evidence do you. Unless you're withholding it from us, but why would you do that? I for one, would welcome evidence of God.

 

[Freodin]

And there is no infallible way to prove that theories are absolutly what happened. But people still believe they are true and even fact. Which I have yet to see one definiton of any type of theory that says: It's absolute truth. In order to even get someone to even understand the concept of a theory, they have to be taught that there are many levels of truth, and a lie (a disproved theory) is just someone elses opinion. So when we redefine what these words mean, it's no wonder people will accept just about anything that sounds fesible.

If anyone states that science is able to provide absolute truths, he is incorrect. Science can only provide provisional truths, and test them, and continue to test them until they fail. But as long as these "theories" don´t fail, there is no reason not to accept them.

And that is where the Theory of Evolution and the Theory of Young Earth Creationism differ. YEC has failed the tests, Evolution has not. Perhaps it will be falsified sometimes - but not yet.

Really? When science factors in the equation of an all powerful God, then maybe God's word would make sense to you. But you know that will never happen. And since it won't, it becomes a matter of what side you want to take as truth.

Science cannot factor in an all powerful God - as soon as it does, it ceases to have any meaning.
But so does theology: you have to put limits on your concept of God to be able to explain it - even to talk about it.

In other words, it's a battle for truth. And since you have, along with some others here, decided to go along with the truth that man finds, God cannot be in a picture where man's ideas totally rule the out come.

Man´s ideas is all that man has. Every thing in the Bible is "man´s idea" also, even the concept that the Bible is NOT "man´s idea" is an idea of man.

How do you propose to fight this "battle for truth" when you deliberately discard any weapons that could be used for this battle - conception, ideas, reason?

If God is not factor in, the outcome will never support there ever was a God.

That is not true. God factors in, just not in scientific observations.
The problem you choose to ignore is that as soon as you "factor God in", you can support everything. You have chosen to change your basis of reason from observation to faith, and humans can have faith in all kinds of concepts.
You have discarded every method to find out the truth.

How do you propose to find out which God there is? What he did? What he wants? Whithout a method to test this "truth", it is meaningless.

Besides, I have have yet to find a bible believing atheist.

Why should that be necessary? Do you know of a Qu´ran believing Christian? Or a Vedes believing Shintoist?

Only in theory, which still is not absolute truth. And the reason a theory will not become absolute truth is because it still is in corrective mode. This way science will always have an excuse as to why this theory(ideas) or that theory(ideas) was proven wrong. It was factored in so it makes it ok to be wrong. Even though theories are supposed to be a working progress to finding truth, I have yet to see one actually turn into absolute truth. Which by the standards you judge God's word, would not be any different. It just can't be explained. Which science runs into that all the time.

And why is that bad? Again your problem is that you simply did away with this "corrective mode" - you don´t have any way to correct your ideas should they be incorrect.
But by doing this, you have also discarded any method to show the ideas of others incorrect.
You have only your faith - it is the sole measure of truth. Nothing else matters.

Don´t you see that this is not a way to find out any kind of truth?

 

[obediah001]

Multiplicity of words & what nonsense it is! God is & creation is true evolution a lie. Science is a creation of Christian faith itself!

 

[toff]

Why can't creationists at least post honestly? They are told repeatedly what science is, how it works...and still post falsehoods about it, like the below...

There's no trick to it. Science just refuses to look at anything that supports God.

There is no scientific evidence to support any god. Not because there is no god, but because gods are outside the realm of science.

How long has science been building the evolution and old earth theory? All that work down the toliet if God were proven.

False. If god were proven somehow, NO part of evolutionary theory would be even remotely be "down the toilet". That is why science does not involve gods. It involves observation and hypotheses. If there is a god - and there may be - evolutionary theory is still as accurate as it ever was.

So do you think science will ever go in that direction and answer to why this other thing was even considered? Nope. It's one thing to support an untruth, it is quite another to have to explain why the untruth was told and taught to millions. The search for evidence of God by science will never happen. Only all the evidence that keeps God and his followers at bay. And why would God allow this? Because the true God always allows choices. He does not force His views upon others.

Yes, the search for evidence of God by science will never happen. Not for the paranoid reasons that you assume, but because gods are outside the realm of science. Science says nothing whatsoever about their existence, non-existence, or actions if they exist.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I ask, why not six days?

Why not six days? Or six minutes? Or six-thousanths of a second? Or six Billion years?

No reason why He couldn't, or wouldn't. So let's see if we can figure out what he did.

And "poof" is magic. There's a difference between the power of God and magic.

What's the difference? Are you suggesting God can't *POOF* if He wanted to?

6 days makes God out to be God.

How? Why does God have to take 6 days? I thought He did what he wanted, How He wanted to do it...

Billions of years puts such a limitation on God to create, that God would not be God.

Why? God works on a timetable different from the rest of us; why not take billions of years? Why hurry an important job?

Who are you to rush God?

In the word of God, God had it written, as a teaching tool.

After so long, we FINALLY agree on something: The Bible is a teaching tool.

So are the literature textbooks I use with my Freshman classes. And they teach just fine regardless of whether the stories are true or not.
Actually, they teach better when the stories are not accurate history, but carefully written and selected to teach specific lessons.

Poof would have taught nothing about the power of God as well as billions of years.

A being so powerful that He just snaps his fingers and *POOF*! There's the universe. That doesn't impress you?

A being so wise that He can set a plan in motion billions of years ago, knowing that it will produce the desired result? Nothing to learn here?

Ikester, I think you ask too much of your God...

Besides, God had just created time as well. In his creation, He had to show us a week(funny that it's 7 days just like the full seven days of creation including the rest day).

So man, as always, chooses to imitate God, who is limited by our concept of time. He takes seven days, so must we.

Now I think you expect too little of your God.

Why six days? 6 is also the number of man. 7 is the number of God.

The Ancient Hebrews were heavy into numerology. It's an effective tool in oral tradition.

So we work six and go to church (supposed to go) on the seventh.

Chicken or the egg time...

According to Hebrew belief, which was already firmly established before Genesis was written, 6 days+sabbath was already part of the tradition; any decent creation myth also seeks to explain such customs and traditions in it.

Besides, billions of years also makes the creation not work.

More limits on your God's power. Now I'm wondering how anyone can be impressed with such a limited being.

I remember someone here saying on a thread a few months ago that some things would die before other things were created.

That's the food chain for you; nearly everything is food for something else.

And that was a reference to only 6 days. But how about billions of years? There to much life on earth that relies on other life in order to survive. So six days work just fine.

Utter nonsense, and you don't even have a link to back it up.

 

[michabo]

Science is a creation of Christian faith itself!

A scientist might be a christian, but it is nonsense to suggest that blind faith should have created science and scepticism. Are you going to offer an argument for this assertion?