Why I believe Creation is factually accurate – The Reality!

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Say what you want... It won't change what is coming down the Prophetic road Very Soon...

Ezekiel's Prophecies

Dispensationalist Bible teacher, Jack Kelley, suggests that we look to the book of Ezekiel for a chronological account of Israel's future history. Ezekiel chapters 36 and 37 predict Israel's rebirth as a nation. Chapter 38 says this will occur after a long period of desolation.

Watch Russia & Iran

Then chapters 38 and 39 describe a battle wherein Russia and Iran invade Israel. It will be during this time that there are signs of Christ's imminent return. Please note that we appear to be very close to this event! Keep your eye on Russia and Iran.

Calculations

No matter which signs you give attention - whether the fig tree, Jerusalem, or the rebirth of the nation prophesied in Ezekiel and other passages - the rebirth of Israel and especially the retaking of Jerusalem in 1967 are extremely important prophetic markers in our time.

Jack Kelley speculates, "Considering that a biblical lifespan (or a "generation") is 70 or 80 years (Psalm 90:10), along with the end times beginning with Israel's rebirth in 1948, and the Lord's promise that those being born at the beginning of the end would still be alive when all was completed (Matt. 24:34), I believe that all End Times prophecies including the Lord's return could be fulfilled as early as 2018 and no later than 2037" (Kelly, "Peace for Israel").

Hmmm...remember that this is all just fascinating conjecture..."Of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone" (Mark 13:32). However, Jesus also expects us to discern the times..."Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times?" (Matthew 16:3)

www.remnantreport.com...

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Rustami

 

The Bible sure is the most influential book in history...

can't believe you admitted to that

that people haven't read. It's also the best selling book in history (for now, the Qu'ran will probably overtake it eventually) that people haven't read.

I agree to an extent and have encountered all sorts of ridiculous scenarios due to that fact..Gideons are freely given and distributed as was mine NT, though have purchased bibles for additional information like a Thompson Chain, a Hebrew Greek Key and a few others for more in depth study - well worth it in all cases

The Gideons International, founded in 1899, serves as an extended missionary arm of the church and is the oldest association of Christian businessmen and professional men in the United States of America..It's been just over 100 years since The Gideons International placed the first Bible in a hotel room in Montana..Gideons distribute God's Word as a free gift. Bibles and New Testaments are printed and shipped through the generous support of individual Christians and local churches. The Scriptures, which are printed in more than 90 languages, are then distributed by dedicated members of The Gideons International in more than 190 countries around the world.

The Gideons will supply, free of charge, a New Testament to every member of the U.S. Armed Forces and to patients at U.S. Veterans Administration hospitals..Hospital Testaments with Psalms are available for the bedside in base hospitals or in U.S. Veterans Administration hospitals. New Testaments may also be distributed to medical personnel working at such hospitals.

also Bibles and New Testaments are personally distributed by members to these

Prisoners and police, fire, medical and military personnel
Hotels and motels
Hospitals, convalescent homes, medical offices and domestic violence shelters
Prisons and jails www.gideons.org...

maybe you'll have an easier time comprehending middle english- personally enjoy it myself for various reasons

Quran~Sinai~curse of the law

Sharīʿah (Arabic: شريعة‎ šarīʿah, IPA: [ʃaˈriːʕa], "way" or "path") is the code of conduct or religious law of Islam. Most Muslims believe Sharia is derived from two primary sources of Islamic law: the precepts set forth in the Qur'an..Muslims believe Sharia is God's law en.wikipedia.org...

For alle that ben of the werkis of the lawe, ben vndur curse; for it is writun, Ech man is cursid, that abidith not in alle thingis that ben writun in the book of the lawe, to do tho thingis.

And who euere kepith al the lawe, but offendith in oon, he is maad gilti of alle.

For the lawe was youun bi Moises; but grace and treuthe `is maad bi Jhesu Crist. No man sai euer God, no but the `oon bigetun sone, that is in the bosum of the fadir, he hath teld out.

For euery lawe is fulfillid in o word, Thou schalt loue thi neiybore as thi silf.

for false britheren that weren brouyt ynne, whiche hadden entrid to aspie oure fredom, which we han in Jhesu Crist, to bring vs in to seruage.

For these ben two testamentis; oon in the hille of Synai, gendringe in to seruage, which is Agar. For Syna is an hille that is in Arabie, which hille is ioyned to it that is now Jerusalem, and seruith with hir children.But that Jerusalem that is aboue, is fre, whiche is oure modir.
For it is writun, Be glad, thou bareyn, that berist not; breke out and crye, that bringist forth no children; for many sones ben of hir that is left of hir hosebonde, more than of hir that hath an hosebonde. en.wikisource.org...(Wycliffe)/Galathies#Chapter_3

The Bible is a book devoid of historical knowledge, contradictory within itself, and scientifically illiterate to the greatest degree.

only misunderstanding and lack of insight, many things are in depth and people that call God a liar or those under law (world/flesh) will never grasp it (they are self-contridicting), unless?..that being said there are places within the scriptures that admit to the lying pen of the scribes, so...

with oute schame, riytli tretinge the word of treuthe.

As and in alle epistlis he spekith `in hem of these thingis; in which ben summe hard thingis to vndurstonde, whiche vnwise and vnstable men deprauen, as also thei don othere scripturis, to her owne perdicioun.

I mean, a flat, circular Earth with stars as fixed to a dome above it and the Sun and Moon going about within that dome? I'm sorry, but how is this a book that (I think this is what you're implying) predicts hard drives?

can you name anything made that was'nt/is'nt dependant on the earth and heavens?-which were created

God that made the world and alle thingis that ben in it, this, for he is Lord of heuene and of erthe, dwellith not in templis maad with hoond, nethir is worschipid bi mannus hoondis, nether hath nede of ony thing, for he yyueth lijf to alle men, and brethinge, and alle thingis

For in hym alle thingis ben maad, in heuenes and in erthe, visible and vnuysible, ether trones, ether dominaciouns, ether princehodes, ethir poweris, alle thingis ben maad of nouyt bi hym, and in hym,

In the bigynnyng was the word, and the word was at God, and God was the word.
This was in the bigynnyng at God.Alle thingis weren maad bi hym, and withouten hym was maad no thing, that thing that was maad. In hym was lijf, and the lijf was the liyt of men; and the liyt schyneth in derknessis, and derknessis comprehendiden not it.

But it is hid fro hem willynge this thing, that heuenes were bifore, and the erthe of water was stondynge bi watir, of Goddis word;bi which that ilke world clensid, thanne bi watir perischide. But the heuenes that now ben, and the erthe, ben kept bi the same word, and ben reseruyd to fier in to the daien.wikisource.org...(Wycliffe)/John

reply to post by edmc^2
Hi Edmc –

Before we start, always be sure to use the term ELOHIM (not ‘God’)when engaged in a discussion about the creator clan-god mentioned in the 1st Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 1:1 to 2:4a) and be sure to use YHWH-ELOHIM when speaking about the clan god mentioned in the 2nd Creation Myth of the Jews (Gen 2:4b to 4:25).

When you incorrectly use the term “God” you muddy the waters of your discussion and become ‘epistemologically incoherent’ since “God” could refer to EL, or Ba’al, or Ashur, or Amun-Re or El-Elyon or El-Shaddai or even Dagon for that matter, so be very careful with your terms.

We must never muddle our clan gods, middle eastern or otherwise.

Now, first : do you DENY that there exists (2) contradictory Creation Myths of the Jews in Genesis (Creation Myth Number 1, sometimes called P for Priestly - Gen 1:1 to 2:4a) and (Creation Myth Numbr 2, sometimes called JE for Jahwist-Elohist – Gen 2:4b to 4:25)?

Have you even bothered to compare them closely, I mean word for word in Hebrew? If not take a beginniners Hebrew class and get cracking.

Secondly, do you REALLY believe Vegetation and Herbs and Grasses could ever exist on a formless earth that has no sun made yet? I mean, REALLY?

Genesis 1 says that plants were created before the sun which is clearly scientifically impossible, since plants need sunlight to exist. It says that earth was created before the stars which is also impossible, since planets are forged from heavy metals created in stars.

It also claims that Daytime was created before the Sun which is bizarre even from a pagan point of view - it also says that trees came before fish, and that birds came before "creeping things" – both statements being quite contrary to the fossil record.

Your jejune answer was no answer at all. You have not explained how Green Vegetation (e.g. grasses and trees) can be ‘brought into being’ without any photo-synthetic solar activity. Your ‘answer’ is in fact a non-answer.

As for the Reqia’k – obviously you must believe that it is a solid dome since after all, the poetical sections of the book of Job (see the literary fragment in chapter 26) speak about the Dome of Heaven being supported by ‘pillars’ that ‘shake and tremble at the Rebuke of ELOAH’.

The ancient Israelites saw the cosmos more like their pagan neighbours and far differently from the way modern science does.

Their preSccientific ideas of the cosmos is incongruent with today’s modern science, but alas, it was the premise upon which Genesis 1 was written.

The First Creation Myth of the Jews in Genesis 1:1 to 2:4a mentions the Dome (Reqia’k) aka "the firmament" some NINE times.

According to Hebrew cosmology, the firmament is a solid structure which separates the oceans of heaven from the atmosphere of the sky, and thus keeps the oceans of heaven from crashing down.

If this were accurate, then the mission to the moon would have needed a water capable submarine. There are floodgates in heaven which open up and pour these oceans into the clouds.

To the Israelite mind, clouds are like giant bags that transport rain on to a flat earth and they tell us (e.g. in Job) that it is practically a miracle that the baggy-clouds don’t burst like water balloons under the weight of the water.

As for snow, see the Scroll of Astronomical Henoch among the Dead Sea Scroll fragments where snow and hail are both held in warehouses of heaven.

This is also the cosmological view shared by ancient Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians and Assyrians, but it not a cosmological view shared by ‘modern science’ to-day.

From these and other pre-Scientific absurdities of the Jews, it is clear that they did not fully comprehend the process of evaporation, and therefore invented other means to explain what we to-day call ‘precipitation’.

Elsewhere, the Hebrew Bible states that the Stars are actually angels who live inside the firmament like gods of their neighbours who also use the same type of language. To them, since rainwater is above the firmament, and stars are within it, rainwater is right above the stars.

They were blissfully unaware (like you are, apparently !) that the stars in our Galaxy are not many light years away from the earth in outer space but very close to home shining away in common rainwater...

To their warped and preScientific and what we would to-day call ‘superstitious ways of thinking’, the Reqia’k (‘solid dome’) rotates around the earth, and with it, all the heavenly bodies: the sun, the moon, and the stars all rotate around the earth which is contrary to what Copernicus discovered and what modern Science knows as ‘fact’...

Also, as I mentioned, their description of the Reqia’k (i.e the solid metal or stone dome of Heaven) is so heavy that it needs to be supported by pillars in the sky (see the literary Fragment of Job found in chapter 26 of the poem).

As a side note for your edification on these little matters of which you seem to be ‘blissfully unaware’ the older poetical sections of the Book of Job (note that even within the poem of Job, we can see the presence of at least 2 writers, one far more gifted than the other – so the whole mishmash is a literary hotchpotch as it stands now in the various confused and erratic fragmentary texts of the ‘book’ that have managed to survive throughout the ages down to the present time) – there exists references to a THIRD Creation Myth of the Jews, very similar to the Canaanite myths of the Caanaanite god LOTAN (and Bull-EL) and also of the pre-Israelite god YAM (‘who holds back the Sea by the strength of his Right Arm forever) which are echoed in the preExilic paleoHebrew mess of contradictory constonantal texts forming what has come down to us in the various hand copied text versions of Proto-Isaiah (e.g. the Hebrew consonantal Vorlagen to the Greek LXX found amongs the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Targums or the late Masoretic 'pointed' text copies etc.)

(see proto-Isaiah. 27:1 - using the consonantl proto Masoretic (pMT)

In that Day YHWH shall take his Mighty Long Sword of Power
And with it he shall attack Lotan (MT: Leviathan) the Fleeing Serpent,
Even Lotan (MT: Leviathan) the Crooked serpent;
Yea, he shall slay the Mighty Dragon that is in the Sea.)

Now, seriously, do you REALLY believe in Sea Serpents like the ‘pagan’ Canaanite god (LVTN) Lotan / Leviatan that had to be crushed by a clan god (whether Bull-EL, or ELOAH, or El-Shaddai, or YAM, or Ba'al or Hadad or YHWH etc.) when the Cosmos was 'created'?

At any rate, none of this warped pre-Scientific and absurd Mythological 'Cosmology' (!) can ever be termed ‘Modern Science’ by any stretch, and any rationalization to that effect would only make the attmpt quite ridiculous in the eyes of even a 10 year old, much less any more educated and rational human being.

The Israelite conception of world geography is also jejune and can be reflected in some of the Psalms where we read that in the beginning, the Waters of Creation (pace the literature and religious cosmological outlook of e.g. the Egyptians and the Sumero-Babylonians) covered an entire (flat) earth, but YHWH set a ‘compass’ on ‘the faces of the waters’ to draw a circle where dry land would appear and like the activity of the pagan Canaanite god YAM (or in other texts, Bull-EL) , ‘the flood-waters receded at his command’, and so dry land was born – where there is only a single Continent, in the shape of a single giant circle – hence EL sits upon the circle of the earth." It does NOT mean the Earth is a SPHERE – but more like a flat pancake like structure 'sitting upon the faces of the waters'.

But back to the Two Creation Myths in the mangled Hebrew versions of the book of Genesis since we have a habit of getting side-tracked !

You did know, didn’t you, that in the 1st Creation Myth of Genesis (1:1 to 2:4a continued in Gen 5:1 and following ) that MALE and FEMALE are created TOGETHER, ‘and he called THEIR name ADAM in the day in which they were created, and ELOHIM blessed them…’ Gen 5:1b) and that according to the P writer of these sections there is not HAVVAH (or HAYYAH) i.e. Eve ‘formed’ from Adam’s ‘side’?

How do you account for that, ahem, little discrepancy? It is called CONTRADICTORY Myth making. Get used to it when reading the Hebrew Scriptures (and the fact that the Canaanites, and Egyptians and Sumerians and Akkadians and Assyrians and Babylonians also too had their Contradictory Myths - a result of competing traditions held 'sacred' by the priests of the ancient cult centers or 'temples' to their own various and sundry clan-gods over the millenia - is NO excuse for them either !)

In fact, even upon cursory reading, the (2) Contradictory Creation Myths in Genesis simply CANNOT be rationalized in terms of a single coherent story of crfeation – the mangled fragmentary texts in the book bear witness to the various cults within proto-Judaeism that were brought together in various versions/text families of hand copied scrolls around the time of Ezra (c. 420 BCE) in order to placate all the different surviving priestly groups that were in competition with each other after the Babylonian Exile (587 BCE to c. 530 BCE) to have their own ‘literature’ preserved in some way in the rebuilding of the state under the Persians (c. 531 BCE to 331 BCE) during the 200 years that Yehud/ Judah was a Satrapy of Persia.

Also, you are aware, aren’t you, that there are other non-scientific terms being bandied about by both of the Creation Myths of the post-Exilic Jews in the book of Genesis – e.g. ‘the Wind of Elohim brooded over the faces of the Waters of Creation” – all very cute paleo Hebrew poetry in its way, but certainly it is not ‘positivistic science’ in the modern sense of the words to speak using preScientific terms like the ‘Waters of Creation ‘ in the same way the ancient Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians and Egyptians used to when praising their own clan-gods’ creation of the Cosmos.

You are aware, aren’t you, that the texts of the 2 Creation Myths of the Jews in Genesis (1:1 to 2:4a and 2:4b to 4:25) are cultic (i.e. priestly) literary-poetic works of praise to a post Exilic creator clan-god, and not ‘hard science’ in any modern sense of the word – all of which were NOT meant to be understood as science i.e. taken ‘literally’ - and that the writers (whoever they were) made constant use of literary sources of their more sophisticated ‘pagan’ (i.e. goyim) neighbours, many of whose very sophisticated poetical literature flowed into pre-Israelite Canaan from very early periods (e.g. see the Ras Shamra texts etc.) and that (not to put too fine a point on it) the priestly writers of the 2 Creation Myths in Genesis (whoever they were) had been forced to live with their more sophisticated pagan neighbours abroad as a result of forced political Exile (i.e. into Assyria, Babylon, Egypt etc.)?

Despite some Chrsitian apologist (ahem) ‘scholars’ over the past 70 years trying in their own inane way desperately to ‘prove’ that these 2 Myths are in some weird way ‘complementary’ , we can see that by a close reading of the actual texts themselves proved that this attempt is quite futile- the two myths CANNOT be reconciled.

And (quite apart from everything else discussed so far) is ultimately the deciding factor here : you simply CANNOT take liturgical mythmaking such as we find in the confused textual traditions within 'Genesis' at all literally. Full Stop.

As for the 'pagan literary sources' that are used and sometimes 'refuted' in the form of polemics in these various myth fragments in Genesis, how do YOU explain the brutal fact that the (2) Creation myths of the Jews in the confused paleo-Hebrew text copies of ‘Genesis’, along with all the other ‘origin’ myths found in Genesis chapter 1 through chapter 11 are all based on far older Egyptian, Sumerian and Assyro-Babylonian literary works – some more than 2,000 years older than the material found in the Torah?

Here’s a handy link for your homework assignment tonight. Be sure to look up all the ‘big words’ you might not understand…

bibledashboard.com...

For further reading, and to gain anything like an understanding of the many Sumero-Akkadian and Egyptian ‘pagan’ source material for all the language used in the confused Creation Myths of the Jews in Genesis (and elsewhere in the mangled copies of the Hebrew Scriptures that have come down to us), you will have to wrap your arms around ANET (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, ed. Pritchard, re-printed in 1992)

www.logos.com...

Until next time….!

reply to post by Rustami


You seem to believe the bible is the truth and infallible...well...to put it blatantly, you couldn't be more wrong

That book is full of inaccuracies and blatantly wrong information: Source

Also, it's beyond hilarious how anyone could seriously argue the people back then somehow had a deeper understanding of how things work than we today...especially given how many claims in the bible are demonstrably wrong. Ignorance at its best

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Caleb.K

 

I'm sorry, but we have enough "missing link" fossils to start a skeletal circus at this point. Links between birds and dinosaurs, fish and tetrapods, human and ape, snake and limbed lizard.

Which missing link don't we have?

OH we also have plenty of speciation events recorded.

Hahahahahahah. Name one. Which hasn't been proven as a hoax.

reply to post by Caleb.K


Actually, not one of those is a hoax

But who cares about facts, right?

The arrogance is mind boggling!

reply to post by Sigismundus


I don’t know if I need to reply to this long diatribe of yours since you’ve completely ignored my reply to your last post. And I don’t know if you’re even aware of it but this latest lecture of yours just like the last one, more inconsistencies and errors and just plain nonsense. I’m not surprised though because you’re associating and comparing the Bible to pagan myths.

It’s like comparing a Bugatti Veyron to an old beat up rusty Ford Pinto (nothing against Ford) – concluding that they are the same because the bolts and nuts show some semblance.

Anyhow, to prove my point – let me just address one item because you will ignore it anyway.

You said:

You did know, didn’t you, that in the 1st Creation Myth of Genesis (1:1 to 2:4a continued in Gen 5:1 and following ) that MALE and FEMALE are created TOGETHER, ‘and he called THEIR name ADAM in the day in which they were created, and ELOHIM blessed them…’ Gen 5:1b) and that according to the P writer of these sections there is not HAVVAH (or HAYYAH) i.e. Eve ‘formed’ from Adam’s ‘side’?

Here’s Gen 5:1-2:

“5 This is the book of Adam’s history. In the day of God’s creating Adam he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them. After that he blessed them and called their name Man in the day of their being created.” (Genesis 5:1-2)

Your proof of contradiction is that even though the first man and first woman had names (Adam and Eve) yet the Bible says that Jehovah (YHWH) “blessed them and called their name Man in the day of their being created.”.

Or "and he called THEIR name ADAM in the day in which they were created.

So this is your contention? I’m really surprised Sigismundis for a “specialist” like you that you’re not able to figure this one out. How come I can easily figure it out even though you think that my understanding is “shocking and painfully jejune”.

Anyway let me explain why there’s no contradiction.

You see Sigismundus – the word ADAM or the Hebrew word., ’a-dham′ not only mean Adam (the man, the human) but it also stands for Earthling Man OR MANKIND.

Here’s Strongs:

Strong's H120 - 'adam
אָדָם
Transliteration-------------------
'adam --------------------- Pronunciation --- ä•däm' (Key)

Part of Speech----------------
masculine noun------------------ Root Word (Etymology)
From אָדַם (H119)

TWOT Reference
25a

Outline of Biblical Usage

1) man, mankind
a) man, human being
b) man, mankind (much more frequently intended sense in OT)
c) Adam, first man
d) city in Jordan valley

www.blueletterbible.org...


So to refer to both Male and Female as Man is correct because they are MANKIND.

In fact The Hebrew word occurs as “man,” “mankind,” or “earthling man” over 560 times in the Scriptures and is applied to individuals and mankind in general. It is also used as a proper name.

Here’s how ASV translates it:

“male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”

OKAY?

I hope this is clear enuff.

Ty,
edmc2

reply to post by edmc^2


My High Elf's fire sword +4 penetrates your halfling's enchanted leather armor +1. Better roll nicely the next time or you'll lose this DnD game

I don't mind discussing the bible, but since it's only evidence of what people believed thousands of years ago and not how reality really is, it seems kinda silly. After all, we're trying to seriously discuss how life might have to come into existence. I don't think using fiction as a guideline is clever

When it comes to discussing this fiction, I have to admit, sigimundus seems to research his stuff quite well. Much better than most self-proclaimed Christians. Of course actually researching the content of the bible just reinforces the fact that it's only proof of what people BELIEVED to be true back then, and some people might not like that.

If you are 45yrs, and went to church every weekend, you spent around 145 days of your life believing in something that is demonstrably wrong. That assumes you're awake for 24hrs per day, in reality, you spent closer to a year on that instead of spending it with your kids, enjoying life, watching the Sunday games, doing community work, talking to your friends, and so on.

I'd never attack someone who admits to being wrong and believing in something that is demonstrably wrong. Hell, there's a few guys on here that went through that...and I take my hat of to them. It takes a great man to admit you're wrong, to defy ignorance, and open your eyes to the (sometimes) harsh reality. HOWEVER, continuing to delude yourself in an effort to protect a fantasy house of cards is ridiculous and beyond ignorant....especially if it's demonstrably illogical, irrational, and just plain wrong to believe in that fantasy world. It's like talking to someone who takes DnD too seriously

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by Rustami

 

You seem to believe the bible is the truth and infallible...well...to put it blatantly, you couldn't be more wrong

That book is full of inaccuracies and blatantly wrong information: Source

you too seem to have a comprehension problemo - do you understand what "these are the scriptures that bear witness of me" means? or "whoever was not found written in the book of life"- I personally have no problem with delusional men wishing they were never created, after all you only harm yourselves and for no good as all history proves.. also would'nt you say it's just a tad bit interesting that you and your compadres predictably react exactly as Jesus said you would two Grand ago?

Ye dispiseris, se ye, and wondre ye, and be ye scaterid abrood; for Y worche a werk in youre daies, a werk that ye schulen not bileue, if ony man schal telle it to you.en.wikisource.org...(Wycliffe)/Dedis_of_Apostlis#Chapter_13

reply to post by Rustami


How exactly do I harm myself not believing in fairy tales that aren't backed up by objective evidence?

Also care to post any objective evidence rather than quotes from a book written by men based on the limited knowledge they had back then? Right now all you're doing is preaching

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/24ebb6a6386e.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by MrXYZ

So it comes down to this, your best argument is semantics? Really?

Took the words out of my mouth/keyboard – for a diehard atheist like you MrXYZ that worship on the altar of science I’m surprised these are just “semantics”. That’s is amazing grace.

Yet you changed your statement to exactly what I said. So are they just semantics? Really?

So let’s compare again:

I said:

To be scientifically precise – 'He OBSERVED Gravity' - is the correct scientific explanation. It's like the wind although invisible to the naked eye we know it's there because we can OBSERVE its effects. Just like magnetic force – we know it's there because we can OBSERVE its effects. Just like radio waves – we know it's there because we can OBSERVE its effects.

You now say:

He saw the effects of gravity, that's a fact. So I used "gravity" instead of "effects of gravity". The point still stands, he was able to measure and like you say observe it. The same can't be said about god, because there's ZERO objective evidence supporting the claim he/she/it even exists

So you agree that I’m correct. That is amazing grace! "He saw the effects of gravity, that's a fact." NOT "He SAW gravity". EFFECTS - as in OBSERVE the EFFECTS of GRAVITY.

Yet you still can’t accept it.

In short, nothing you posted in this thread proves your point. Like so many other creationists you state the conclusion first, and then try to dig up evidence, instead of the other way around. And hell, you even fail at that

Better shore up because your credibility is crumbling like a broken levee.


Since you don't have any answer to where life came from here's another chance for you:

What’s your answer to the question:

Where did the star Dust came from?


Ty,
edmc2

reply to post by edmc^2


So wait, let me get this straight: Because I typed "saw gravity" instead of "saw the effects of gravity" you believe I should now accept the rest of your claims? Seriously?

Oh, and I don't worship science. I'm interested in science because I believe looking at objective evidence is the best way to learn about the world we live in...but that doesn't mean I "worship" it

I also like poker...doesn't mean I worship it

Although, come to think of it, after winning with 86s against KK AIPF I might reconsider and sacrifice a baby seal to the poker gods

Originally posted by MrXYZ
reply to post by edmc^2

 

So wait, let me get this straight: Because I typed "saw gravity" instead of "saw the effects of gravity" you believe I should now accept the rest of your claims? Seriously?

Oh, and I don't worship science. I'm interested in science because I believe looking at objective evidence is the best way to learn abou

NO - just saying that what I said are factually accurate even though you don't believe them - that's all.

But if I'm right on this one what about the rest? Like the Universe and the Earth had a beginning and the earth is hanging upon nothing or empty space that life can only come from life?

Of course you don't subscribes to these scientifically proven concepts - just like the concept of infinity or space.

Or is it just ONE - the existence of God?

Am I correct so far?

ty,
edmc2

reply to post by MrXYZ


you'll need to do some backtracking on posts due to your question already being answered but to put it bluntly I tell you and whosoever what I know for a fact about what I've seen and heard before knowing any scriptures, it is specific to a time as well as eternity and matches verbatum

Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.www.biblegateway.com...

imagine that

He that cam from aboue, is aboue alle; he that is of the erthe, spekith of the erthe; he that cometh from heuene, is aboue alle.And he witnessith that thing that he hath seie, and herde, and no man takith his witnessing.
But he that takith his witnessyng, hath confermyd that God is sothefast.en.wikisource.org...(Wycliffe)/John#Chapter_3

Here's how I see it.

If God wanted to get his word out to us, he wouldn't have left it to man to carry his word on for 2000 years. He knows we're manipulative, we screw things up, and we're control freaks. Why would he let us create a book, claim it's his word, and have it translated several times to carry on until he comes back?

2,000 years ago we had a flat lander belief. Even today most of the people on this planet still have a flat lander belief. I'm not talking about two dimensional, but just ignorance. Think beyond our 3d universe, there's more to it. With all we know now, don't you think God created this speck of a planet with your speck of a life on it for more than not eating meat on Friday's so you can go to heaven?

Mankind is so wrapped up in itself. There's more to life than your dogma. You're inheriting your mom's mom's mom's mom's mom's beliefs. Deny ignorance. Seek truth.

Originally posted by mathematic
Here's how I see it.

If God wanted to get his word out to us, he wouldn't have left it to man to carry his word on for 2000 years. He knows we're manipulative, we screw things up, and we're control freaks. Why would he let us create a book, claim it's his word, and have it translated several times to carry on until he comes back?

Mankind is so wrapped up in itself. There's more to life than your dogma. You're inheriting your mom's mom's mom's mom's mom's beliefs. Deny ignorance. Seek truth.

He has given us the bible inspired by his word in order to direct us in our lives. The reason he hasn't just come down and controlled us is because he is proving to us, that we are incapable of running the world by ourselves. We need godly rulership rather than an earthly ruler as is evident by the state of the world. Fortunately, god will come and deliver us soon.

reply to post by edmc^2


Well, you're demonstrably wrong in a lot of the stuff you say...

But if I'm right on this one what about the rest?

Let's see...shall we?

Like the Universe and the Earth had a beginning

Sure...the universe didn't always exist in its current form, we know that. But of course that statement's not evidence of a creator

the earth is hanging upon nothing

Gravity isn't "nothing"...look it up Also, how is that evidence of god? I mean, they were clearly wrong in the bible. as gravity isn't "nothing".

life can only come from life

We don't know if that's the case for sure. Hell, if it is, your god theory's nonsense because it doesn't answer the question where god came from.

Am I correct so far?

Not really

You completely omit from showing us clear objective evidence for a creator...all you're doing is taking HUGE leaps of faith

Originally posted by Caleb.K

He has given us the bible inspired by his word in order to direct us in our lives. The reason he hasn't just come down and controlled us is because he is proving to us, that we are incapable of running the world by ourselves. We need godly rulership rather than an earthly ruler as is evident by the state of the world. Fortunately, god will come and deliver us soon.

Caleb,

I have followed that path, but am still seeking truth. The barriers and limitations that had no rationale to them forced me down another path in the fork of the road. I appreciate what you have shared, as I too have waited for that to happen. People in the generation before me waited for it to happen, as had the people before those people, and the people before those people etc. . .

I have chosen to free my mind. I want to open it to possibility that does not rely on any one of thousands of ancient scriptures. The truth is inside. We are all one.

Originally posted by mathematic

Caleb,

I have followed that path, but am still seeking truth. The barriers and limitations that had no rationale to them forced me down another path in the fork of the road. I appreciate what you have shared, as I too have waited for that to happen. People in the generation before me waited for it to happen, as had the people before those people, and the people before those people etc. . .

I have chosen to free my mind. I want to open it to possibility that does not rely on any one of thousands of ancient scriptures. The truth is inside. We are all one.

I respect this, and by no means am i suggesting that you are a ridiculer.

But take this from 2 Peter 3:3,4

"For YOU know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires 4 and saying: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep [in death], all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.”

Many generations have waited for the end to come, however we really are living in the last days, i can't see this world continuing down it's current path for many more years.

I'd just like to add onto my my previous point which you quoted. Think about how many systems of government we have tried over our history. We have tried hierarchy's, monarchy's, dictatorships, communism, democracy and capitalism. We have tried being both isolationist and globalist, however none of these man made systems of government have worked. Most of these types of governments have only been trialled in the last 200 years. Had God intervened earlier, man could have turned around and said that we didn't need him because he never gave us a chance to try all the possible ways of government ourselves. However, there are no other man made governments to try anymore. We have failed, and brought destruction to our world.

But i understand you, if you seek your own light than that is your right. I really hope that in your journey you find it.

I think Richard Dawkins sums it up best...

"The deist God is a physicist to end all physics, the alpha and omega of mathematicians, the apotheosis of designers; a hyper-engineer who set up the laws and constants of the universe, fine-tuned them with exquisite precision and foreknowledge, detonated what we would now call the hot big bang, retired and was never heard from again."