Ask me anything about Creationism!

a reply to: Vector99



Odd the way you define troll and at the same time speak
to the fact that, rather than wasting my life away. Sitting
day in and day out relentlessly chasing creationists around
on ATS. Only to take pot shots at everything they write
and constantly trying to pull them off topic or derail their
threads because you hate the truth. While they do try to
the best of their ability to cast a thread that does offer
some spiritual sustenance. If that makes me a troll? Hell,
I'm good with it.

a reply to: scorpio84

You wrote QUOTE "Yes, I've read them - the meaning is metaphorical. Only morons believe in a literal interpretation of Adam and Eve..." UNQUOTE

So you admit the 2 Creation Myths of the Jews are allegorical / metaphorical (i.e. not literally true) rather than positivisticaly historical, right? But you still cling to the weird notion that the two Creation Myths are not contradictory. Why is that, do you think>

a reply to: Sigismundus

Ah crap...I forgot I was supposed to answer from a Creationist perspective.

Creationist answer:

God works in mysterious ways.

originally posted by: scorpio84
a reply to: Sigismundus

Ah crap...I forgot I was supposed to answer from a Creationist perspective.

Creationist answer:

God works in mysterious ways.

Nice troll thread BTW!

originally posted by: randyvs

originally posted by: scorpio84
a reply to: Sigismundus

Ah crap...I forgot I was supposed to answer from a Creationist perspective.

Creationist answer:

God works in mysterious ways.

Nice troll thread BTW!

Ha - no trolling going on here. Just trying to help people understand the creationist perspective.

a reply to: scorpio84

You are not helping anybody understand anything. The only thing you are doing is making a mockery of the belief of millions of people all over the world.

A2D

Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: scorpio84

You are not helping anybody understand anything. The only thing you are doing is making a mockery of the belief of millions of people all over the world.

A2D

It might be one thing if they were able to offer something better.
But no, all they can do is critisize, judge and insult the real truth.
And offer even greater impossibilities then those they ridicule.
It's insane.

originally posted by: randyvs
It might be one thing if they were able to offer something better.
But no, all they can do is critisize, judge and insult the real truth.
And offer even greater impossibilities then those they ridicule.
It's insane.

"They" being who?

a reply to: Ghost147

Well, it wouldn't be anyone who offers up a good thread once in
a while Ghost. So that excludes you.

Edit: Misread your post

originally posted by: Specimen
Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

The chicken.

a reply to: Agree2Disagree

If you think anything I posted does not represent the creationist perspective, please chime in. Otherwise, what you perceive as "mockery" may be due to the belief itself.

That said - I was evasive about the Adam and Eve answer, so here it is for all interested:

There is no conflict, because Genesis 1 does not state that man and woman were created simultaneously. In fact, Gen. 1 is more like a summary of events, with Gen. 2 getting more into the specifics of that 6th day.

originally posted by: Agree2Disagree
a reply to: scorpio84



You are not helping anybody understand anything. The only thing you are doing is making a mockery of the belief of millions of people all over the world.



A2D

one could argue that judaism is a mockery of every pagan culture it burned down or tried to burn down. one bad joke deserves another, no?

originally posted by: Specimen
Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

originally posted by: scorpio84

originally posted by: Specimen
Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

The chicken.

From the view of Creation, that's an absolutely correct answer. (to answer the question of the original person who asked it) From the view of evidence, however, I answered the question in detail here: Link

a reply to: Ghost147

First, I commend you on that thread you've linked. It seems you've gone to some great lengths to provide clear answers on a range of topics that are frankly way above my head - still it is interesting to read them.

However, when you say "evidence," I will argue, in respect to the Creationist viewpoint, that your evidence is incorrect and the real evidence is to be found in the Bible.

originally posted by: scorpio84
a reply to: Ghost147

First, I commend you on that thread you've linked. It seems you've gone to some great lengths to provide clear answers on a range of topics that are frankly way above my head - still it is interesting to read them.

Thank you very much. Although, I had a lot of help from others there as well. It is a group effort

originally posted by: scorpio84
a reply to: Ghost147
However, when you say "evidence," I will argue, in respect to the Creationist viewpoint, that your evidence is incorrect and the real evidence is to be found in the Bible.

They are more than welcome to critique and refute the evidence we have found

a reply to: scorpio84

Why do creationists feel the need to use science to prove creationist claims, yet still try their best to discredit science and scientists at every possible opportunity?

a reply to: Astyanax

Good question. One would think that appealing to God would be enough. In fact, for many - it is. Maybe those trying to use science secretly feel that science is a better way of explaining things than the Bible.

Is it possible....for God.... to create a rock...so big....that even HE can't move?

And if he does....will he stop being GOD!?