|
|
Post by Kee on Jan 15, 2004 21:00:00 GMT -5
I have no problem with Christians agreeing with what the Bible says. As a Christian myself, I agree with what the Bible says on all counts. The problem is that there are those who assert as truth an interpretation of the Creation parable that runs wholly contrary to the physical evidence. Not only does this utterly destroy their own credibility when witnessing to others, but casts a negative light on the credibility of their fellow Christians.You think they will ever wake up and smell the coffee on this one, Traf? |
|
|
|
Post by Kee on Jan 15, 2004 21:54:14 GMT -5
Kee, Since you askeds questions of Sonworshipper,I will ask some of you.If I remember right you and Heathen(correct me if I am wrong,please) refer to God as the ALL That IS.And I am assuming you believe that the ALL That IS created the world..but just not in the way the Bible said He did. If God is the ALL That Is as you believe,may I ask WHY that you say that Genesis couldn't be true?
First of all that is circular logic...the position that the Bible is true because the Bible says so. Second, it is NOT true that the Sun stopped (as one example), because it is not the Sun that rotates around the earth as ancient man thought. It is the earth that rotates on it's axis. Plus, man thought that the earth was the center of the universe, a belief the Bible reflects. And why would man think that? Why by looking up in the sky and knowing nothing more than what he could observe at the time. I sure hope you at least know this much, and again.... there are so many more such examples. So you think God didn't know any better because all he knew was looking up at the sky or what?
I told you, if God is what you say he is then he would not make these mistakes. Therefore, based on your logic -- the Bible is not from God. Can't doesn't even enter the picture from your position, and neither does truth. |
|
|
|
Post by Himmel on Jan 15, 2004 22:34:00 GMT -5
I think she meant her specific church. Thank you Babysis! :)I was refering to mine. We have very kind and loving clergy and people at our church. I know the faith in general has had its troubles, but their attitude has changed dramatically. They speak out against abortion, capital punishment and war. I don't believe any one faith is better than the other. I was almost going to leave once, but since they really preach God's word and they got the love, I think I'll stay!  |
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Jan 15, 2004 23:57:33 GMT -5
hounddawg - "why,in your own opinion,did God give the Genesis creation account as a parable?"Because His original audience would have been utterly incapable of understanding the Big Bang and evolutionary theory. Beth - "How do you know what happened when?"By examining the physical evidence. "Where you there? Did you hear God say 'let there be evolution'?"Direct observation is hardly necessary to determine that an event has occurred; the physical evidence that has been left as a result of the 3.5 billion year history of life on Earth is more than sufficient to show that all species are evolved from pre-existing species. "I call evolution immanginative junk, but thats just me."Call it what you like, but the evidence has demonstrated evolutionary theory to be valid for nearly 150 years. "How can anyone tell anything about a BONE for crying out loud."In the same way that a poker player can tell that you're bluffing from the way you hold your cards and an arson investigator can determine the source of a fire from a pile of ashes; from years of study and practical application. Thank you for the beautiful illustration of argument from incredulity; that you see nothing more than a bone hardly prevents others from learning valuable information from it. "No you don't agree with the Bible."I'll thank you for not attempting to dictate my beliefs for me in the future. "Last time I looked the Bible was an all or nothing deal. You can't just pick what parts to believe and what parts to disregard."Fine by me, as I do not pick and choose what parts I believe in, nor do I disregard even a single verse of Scripture. "How can anyone know for a fact what happened 1,000 years ago, let alone what happened when the earth was made."Again, by examining the physical evidence. For example, the Age of the Earth of 4.55 billion years has been determined by examining the decay of radioactive isotopes of various elements. "Let scientists speculate till you know where freezes over and they might get 1 tenth of it right."Given that you use science with such consistent success that you take scientific conclusions for granted in every aspect of your life every day, it's pretty safe to say that their success rate is a bit better than 10%. Kee - "You think they will ever wake up and smell the coffee on this one, Traf?"Most of 'em, probably not. --Traf Daddy Bad like Jim Jones, I'll take you out with one punch |
|
|
|
Post by SonWorshiper on Jan 16, 2004 1:21:33 GMT -5
Quote by TD:Not only does this utterly destroy their own credibility when witnessing to others, but casts a negative light on the credibility of their fellow Christians. My Response:I find this fantastic statement to be incredibly hypocritical and not consistent with the evidence. I mean, if you're so concerned about credibility and not being cast in a negative light, why do you conduct yourself with such rudeness and arrogance? A lost person who might happen to stroll on these boards would probably be shocked to find out you are a Christian, considering your rudeness and kockiness. And now, all of a sudden, you're going to try to convince us you're defending Darwinism because you're afraid of how Creationists might hurt their credibility when witnessing to the lost? Gimme a break, man. I find this most appalling, and incredibly hard to believe. And your credibility here may be at an all-time low. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Jan 16, 2004 7:22:49 GMT -5
SonWorshiper - "I mean, if you're so concerned about credibility and not being cast in a negative light, why do you conduct yourself with such rudeness and arrogance?"
As far as my occasionally being rude goes, my guess is that its a product of the treatment I have received by the young Earth creationists on this board and the old boards. As far as being arrogant goes, what you perceive as arrogance is nothing more than confidence in the accuracy of my conclusions derived from the fact that all the evidence is on my side.
"A lost person who might happen to stroll on these boards would probably be shocked to find out you are a Christian, considering your rudeness and kockiness."
Read any of your own posts there lately?
"And now, all of a sudden, you're going to try to convince us you're defending Darwinism because you're afraid of how Creationists might hurt their credibility when witnessing to the lost?"
I've seen it happen more than a few times. When young Earth creationists make these claims that have no basis in reality, they lose any chance of convincing their audience that they are worth listening to if that audience has the slightest bit of knowledge of the natural world.
"And your credibility here may be at an all-time low."
Say what you like, but the evidence is still completely on my side. Speaking of that evidence, you never did manage to provide any specific criticism of any piece of evidence. We're up to 12 individuals who interpret Genesis literally, but we still have yet to have even one present a shred of physical evidence to support that interpretation.
--Y2Traf
Then it comes to be that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel is just a freight train coming your way
|
|
|
|
Post by SonWorshiper on Jan 16, 2004 12:00:59 GMT -5
TD,
Once again, you continue to fail to understand what I've been trying to tell you. The evidence is not what I have an issue with. It's the conclusions drawn from the evidence that I believe are disputable. And the fact that the evidence can only give answers in terms of probabilities, may have's, suppositions, possibilities and coulda's, woulda's and shoulda's proves that their conclusions are disputable, if not even questionable (and I say absolutely questionable because their conclusions are contrary to God's Account of what happened at creation).
Now, who provides these thoughts and conclusions on the evidence? Mere men and women, and generally men and women who don't believe The Bible, and admittedly, they can only give answers like "scientists think," or "the evidence suggests," or "it's possible," or "in all probability," or "it is widely thought," or "studies indicate," or "this may cause," etc.
Basically, this means that a whole theory is based on only possibilities and probabilities. And you're going to alter your beliefs in God's Word based on these possibilities and probabilities? Surely, you can see the folly in this!
I'm sorry, but what scientists think may have occured at the origin of species is just not enough reason to change my interpretation of God's Word. You may exalt and esteem what they think and change your interpretation of God's Word, but I refuse to fall into that trap.
God's Word gives a reasonable and believable account of what happened at the origin of species. I find absolutely no valid reason to change the way I believe in His account.
Sincerely,
SonWorshiper
|
|
Beth
Full Member
Posts: 200
|
Post by Beth on Jan 16, 2004 13:17:23 GMT -5
Aawww does the little traffic demon wanna come out and play with Beth? By examining the physical evidence.Yeah and I suppose GUESSES, THEORIES and CONJECTURE are supposed to be taken for fact. I have an idea (horror of all horrors) what if you and all the other evolutionary monkeys are wrong in those guesses?! Direct observation is hardly necessary to determine that an event has occurred; the physical evidence that has been left as a result of the 3.5 billion year history of life on Earth is more than sufficient to show that all species are evolved from pre-existing species.Uh huh, sure it is  For you to know for a fact, beyond any possible doubts that something happened, somebody had to see it hummm? Call it what you like, but the evidence has demonstrated evolutionary theory to be valid for nearly 150 years.
150 years! Why its so old it must be right! Whatever! Doctors thought sperm came from a mans backbone too, that was supposed to be some rock solid evidence in its day tooo! That was about the time that Muhammed wrote the Quran so that was when? 1500 years ago? In the same way that a poker player can tell that you're bluffing from the way you hold your cards and an arson investigator can determine the source of a fire from a pile of ashes; from years of study and practical application. Thank you for the beautiful illustration of argument from incredulity; that you see nothing more than a bone hardly prevents others from learning valuable information from it.
But thats still taking a gamble on a guess isn't it? I'll thank you for not attempting to dictate my beliefs for me in the future.Your welcome, NOT. Just making an observation FROM THE WORDS OF YOUR OWN MOUTH! Fine by me, as I do not pick and choose what parts I believe in, nor do I disregard even a single verse of Scripture.Look again, you already have! And only 10%, thats not that good really! Listen up bub. You take yourself way too seriously. Who do you think you are really? The way you talk you would think that God should be sitting up in Heaven right now, biteing his nails worrying over whether or not Traffic Demon approves of his word and the job that he is doing on the earth. News flash! From one fly speck to another, your not that important! Here is a little eqution for you, (your good at math too huh?). In Gods big picture of things Mans opinion = contents of a cats litter box. |
|
|
|
Post by Kee on Jan 16, 2004 14:25:21 GMT -5
Aawww does the little traffic demon wanna come out and play with Beth? ROFLMBO.... What is it you think you play with all this acrimonious diaglog of yours toward Traffic, Beth? The non-Christians are just beating your door down so they can act just like ya? Heh! ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by babysis on Jan 16, 2004 14:52:56 GMT -5
Okay, why don't we ALL take a step back and take a BIG breath. Let's ALL remember that we are to be respectful in our postings, no matter how pkmtyolpionately we disagree. This goes for EVERYONE, including myself.
|
|
Beth
Full Member
Posts: 200
|
Post by Beth on Jan 16, 2004 17:32:31 GMT -5
ROFLMBO.... What is it you think you play with all this acrimonious diaglog of yours toward Traffic, Beth? The non-Christians are just beating your door down so they can act just like ya? Heh! ;D ;D People like you and Traffic don't like it when you get treated the way you treat others huh? Not very pleasant hmmm? Just like him, you think its just the greatest thing to insult and hurt others feelings. But when it comes to your own thats and entirely different story. But ohhh just a minute I forgot its okay for you and him to be flippant and disregard what other people consider to be evidence of their beliefs, just because your not Christian. But Christians on the other hand, they just better not stand up for themselves! You will get from me the treatment you give to others. Play nice and Ill play nice, otherwise Im a pitbull. |
|
|
|
Post by Traffic Demon on Jan 16, 2004 17:51:21 GMT -5
SonWorshiper - "It's the conclusions drawn from the evidence that I believe are disputable."
But you have not given any logical basis by which to dispute those conclusions.
"And the fact that the evidence can only give answers in terms of probabilities, may have's, suppositions, possibilities and coulda's, woulda's and shoulda's proves that their conclusions are disputable"
Nobody has said that scientific conclusions cannot be disputed; on the contrary, scientific conclusions are disputed all the time. However, when such disputes arise, the differing conclusions are judged solely by the accuracy with which they describe the evidence. The dispute over the validity of evolutionary theory ended over a century ago, when the scientific community recognized that it described our observations better than any other model.
"Mere men and women, and generally men and women who don't believe The Bible"
Whether or not a scientist holds to any religious faith is irrelevant, as the evidence is the sole basis for the formation of a theory. Conclusions based on faith, any faith, are eventually found out for what they are, and if they are not consistent with the evidence, they are discarded.
"Basically, this means that a whole theory is based on only possibilities and probabilities."
And so is gravitational theory, general relativity, and the theory of a heliocentric solar system. However, like evolutionary theory, these three theories are recognized as the most likely to be true, given the body of evidence.
"And you're going to alter your beliefs in God's Word based on these possibilities and probabilities? Surely, you can see the folly in this!"
No, folly is forming a conclusion which ignores these conclusions. Folly is defining as false any evidence or conclusion which contradicts a model of the universe that you mandate remain true despite the complete lack of evidence supporting it.
"but what scientists think may have occured at the origin of species is just not enough reason to change my interpretation of God's Word."
Evolutionary theory is not "what scientists think may have occurred," it is what the evidence shows did occur.
"God's Word gives a reasonable and believable account of what happened at the origin of species."
A literal interpretation of that account is only "reasonable and believable" if one entirely ignore the body of evidence which renders such an interpretation false. Any conclusion which remains true only at the exclusion of evidence cannot be regarded as logical.
Beth - "Aawww does the little traffic demon wanna come out and play with Beth?"
Yup, and I'm going to win, because young Earth creationism simply has no evidence to support it. If you feel otherwise, grab your evidence, and let's play.
"Yeah and I suppose GUESSES, THEORIES and CONJECTURE are supposed to be taken for fact."
No, scientific principles are to be taken as the best available explanations for the observations we make, because that is precisely what they are.
"I have an idea (horror of all horrors) what if you and all the other evolutionary monkeys are wrong in those guesses?!"
You can "what if" all you want, but until you present evidence to support your implication, the statement that evolutionary theory is in any way incorrect carries no weight.
"For you to know for a fact, beyond any possible doubts that something happened, somebody had to see it hummm?"
Not at all; were this the case, most, and in some cases all, of the conclusions of astronomy, geology, paleontology, physical anthropology, and archaeology would have to be discarded. If a phenomenon has left evidence of its pkmtyolping, the existence of that evidence removes the need for direct observation to verify its occurrence.
"150 years! Why its so old it must be right!"
Given that the past 150 years have given rise to a greater volume of scientific discovery, far more intense scrutiny of scientific principles, and more scientists investigating phenomena than the entire span of human existence preceding it, that evolutionary theory has survived intact for that time allows us to place a great deal of confidence in its accuracy indeed.
" Doctors thought sperm came from a mans backbone too, that was supposed to be some rock solid evidence in its day tooo! That was about the time that Muhammed wrote the Quran so that was when? 1500 years ago?"
Here's the difference; evolutionary theory is supported by genuine evidence, while the claim that sperm comes from a man's backbone had none.
"But thats still taking a gamble on a guess [regarding bones] isn't it?"
Not at all, as the conclusions drawn from those bones, and the bones themselves, may be examined by other experts in the field. This constant peer review of conclusions results in an ever-increasing accuracy of scientific models; regarding such models as accurate when they have survived such rigorous review is hardly a gamble.
"Just making an observation FROM THE WORDS OF YOUR OWN MOUTH!"
Oh really? Would you care to show for me even a single post where I have expressed a disbelief in even a single verse of Scripture? You can't, because I have never made such a post. I believe the Bible to be true, from cover to cover
"Who do you think you are really?"
Somebody who has learned enough to recognize young Earth creationism for the falsehood that it is, and feels obligated as a Christian to denounce it as such.
"People like you and Traffic don't like it when you get treated the way you treat others huh?"
As a newcomer to this board, you haven't been around long enough to see the tone my posts normally take. Most times, I'm playing defense; it's really only on this thread that I've actively gone on the offensive.
--BDT
Everything in the universe vibrates, and therefore sings
|
|
|
|
Post by SonWorshiper on Jan 16, 2004 17:52:44 GMT -5
Hi Beth!
Welcome to the board! I admire your tenacity in defending God's Truth!
But, if I may, I would like to share with you a couple of Scriptures that may lead you to another way of thinking. They're found in Romans 12:17 and I Thessalonians 5:15:
"Recompense no man evil for evil."
"See that none render evil for evil unto any man..."
As Christians, we should never respond to the behavior of others with like behavior. We should never be re-active in our responses. We should be pro-active. In other words, our behavior should always rise above those whose behavior is not Christ-like.
You have a zeal for truth. That's good. But it's a good practice to never stoop to the behavior of others when defending God's Truth. I know that's hard to put into practice sometimes, and it's something we all need to work on, including myself.
Take care and God bless you!
In His Service,
SonWorshiper
|
|
Beth
Full Member
Posts: 200
|
Post by Beth on Jan 16, 2004 20:12:35 GMT -5
As a newcomer to this board, you haven't been around long enough to see the tone my posts normally take. Most times, I'm playing defense; it's really only on this thread that I've actively gone on the offensive
Yeah right, did you realize that you don't have to be a member to read whats posted?
Funny you thought it was fine and dandy to offend someone like waiting, but its a different matter altogether when someone like me gets into you huh?
Yup, and I'm going to win, because young Earth creationism simply has no evidence to support it. If you feel otherwise, grab your evidence, and let's play.
FINALLY! the truth comes out. Thats all this is with you isn't it? You just have to win that point. You just have to shove your UNWANTED opinion down others throats. I have looked at what you called "evidence" its all fanciful crap. Full of we think, it might be, it could be, its possible, etc. etc. ad nauseum.
You say the others have no evidence, well I have looked at theirs too, and it holds just as much water as your garbage does.
So, unless you can produce a viable witness to creation...
Oh really? Would you care to show for me even a single post where I have expressed a disbelief in even a single verse of Scripture? You can't, because I have never made such a post. I believe the Bible to be true, from cover to cover
What do you call your complete disregard of Genisis?
|
|
|
|
Post by hounddawg on Jan 16, 2004 21:10:22 GMT -5
Kee,
Do you trust the ALL That Is? If you do..would you trust Him enough to be Lord of your life? If you TRULY believe that God is the ALL That Is and that He created ALL THAT
IS..then I GUARANTEE you that He more than capable of being Lord of your life!!!!!!!! That's why I have my doubts as to how much you trust God!!!
|
|
For you to know for a fact, beyond any possible doubts that something happened, somebody had to see it hummm?