Your message 1 would qualify as spam, but at least it was forum on-topic spam. Besides, it's hard to get upset about someone trying to give something away free. But I, and probably many others here, are at least somewhat surprised that you came to post a second message.
You seem to be the second member here to be erroneously identified as some variety of a hard core creationist. The first was member Truthlover, who unfortunately has not been heard from in a long time.
Truthlover also started a fair number of other topics. Unfortunately, there is no way to directly link to that topic list, but you can get it by going to the forum search page. Once there, leave the "Search Terms" field blank, leave the "Search Forum or Category" field as the default, select "Thread Titles", and enter Truthlover in the "Search by Author Name" field.
I would like to read your book and bought it for my PC kindle but can't open it without an app that for some reason I can't get.
I have a PDF I can send you if you would like. PM me if you're interested.
I see you have a book proving the Old Earth. From the Bible? Or just from science?
The Old Earth "book" is actually an excerpt from my main book. I make my case using: 1. Living organisms older than 4,500 years (the supposed date of the Nochaic flood), with many much older than 6,000 years. 2. Ancient natural phenomena such as stalactites, varves, ice cores, starlight, moondust, geomagnetic reversal, plate tectonics, etc. 3. Multiple radiometric methods and also many other physics based dating techniques 4. Mixes of the above three (e.g., tree ring counts being cross referenced with carbon dating)
I try to rebut creationist arguments along the way, such as the "appearance of age" or "you're using uniformitarian assumptions" lines of thinking.
(Also, in what sense do you address everybody here as "brothers and sisters?" Most here are not Christians.)
My mistake! I did not think this forum would have such ideological diversity. I truly think that's great. I will keep this fact in mind.
Edited by DeliverUsFromEvolution, : No reason given.
My journey is described on my page, Why I Oppose Creation Science (or, How I got to Here from There).
I just got reading your story, as well as your Message 81. We definitely share a lot of similarities as far as our journeys. It's hard to understand why creationists knowingly use patently false material, but I truly believe it is a matter of "Here's the conclusion, what evidence can we find to fit it?" rather than, "Here's the evidence, what conclusions can we draw?" The latter being the process that every honest truth seeker should utilize, Christians most of all.
One of the things I discovered as a "fellow traveller" was patterns in their training materials. Chick Pubs labeled it as "Liar, Lunatic, or Lord" -- did Jesus lie, was he a lunatic, or was he Lord? Of course, the obvious omission was the basic question of whether such a person as "Jesus" ever existed and whether he had actually said those things.
One of the most disheartening things about creationism being used in apologetics is that it immediately makes all the other arguments tied to it suspect. The very first thing I thought when I learned creationism was bankrupt was, "Lee Strobel lied about creationism being true, did he also lie about Jesus being true?"
The "trilemma" is missing two prongs, I think. There is also the option of "myth" (invented out of whole cloth) and "legend" (Jesus existed but his claims were distorted and exaggerated).
I have used the same process that lead me to the conclusion that evolution can fully account for biological complexity to investigate arguments for God, against God, for the life of the historical Jesus, and for the claims of Jesus. I have spent the past fifteen years reading everything from Anselm to Plantinga, Aquinas to William Lane Craig, Augustine to Betrand Russel, and much more. I have engaged with all of the arguments I could find for and against God's existence, and have read as much as I can about the historical Jesus from skeptics, New Testament scholars, Greek scholars, Mythologists, and Theologians. Though I continue to delve into these topics at least 3-6 days a week, I have come to the conclusion that it is more probable than not that there is a God, and that Jesus was divine and was resurrected.
Of course much more could be said! I could elaborate if anyone wishes. I'd also be interested in your assessment of the evidence.
Basically, there is no inherent conflict between evolution and creation. Science describes how the physical universe works and creation tells us who created that physical universe. No conflict.
But when creationists try to dictate to God how He could have Created, well then, that is where all the trouble starts.
I don't think I could've said it better myself.
"But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to Him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?" Romans 9:20
You describe precisely the problem that I see with creationist claims. May I quote your post here?
By all means. All I ask is that you attribute my name to it.
By all means. All I ask is that you attribute my name to it.
I would never do anything less. I would even link to your own on-line resources, as I have done for others.
My site organization splits off to various topics, only one of which is "creation/evolution" -- at the bottom of pages I provide links back up the chain.
My "creation/evolution" section (http://cre-ev.dwise1.net/index.html) starts with a home page in which I try to explain what it's all about. So far that has never succeeded, so I'm constantly trying to rewrite it. The position that I'm trying to argue from is very different from what everybody else is arguing from, so they misinterpret me from their own mistaken positions.
I've got all kinds of stuff on my links page. I started the whole thing off as a way to link to content that I had uploaded to CompuServe in the late 1980's. So there's a CompuServe depository that I post, but then there's also what I had researched post-CompuServe.
And I discovered Christians and creationists opposing "creation science", so I posted about them. A major influence was Glenn R. Morton. When I started learning about "creation science" circa 1981 and found that their claims were completely bogus, I simplistically assumed that they simply did not know that simple fact and would cleave to truth once they learned the truth. IOW, I had forgotten almost all my fundamentalist Christian training from the Jesus Freak Movement. Instead, any idea that did not conform to their narrow YEC theology could not even be considered.
Just as an aside, I also began to realize that most creationists showing up in forums were just parroting what they had been told and had no idea what they were talking about, so when you tried to actually discuss their claims with them (which is what I would always try to do), they would immediately become defensive and abusive and whatever else it took to break the connection.
Glenn R. Morton was a BA Physics who had become a YEC and studied with the ICR graduate school. In the bleak job market for BA Physics graduates, he went to work for a petroleum exploration company. In that position, he hired on several ICR geology graduates. In the Q&S section of a 1986 presentation to the International Conference on Creationism, he asked John Morris of the ICR how old the earth is. John Morris replied, "If the earth is more than 10,000 years old then Scripture has no meaning." (it's on my quotes page) That is when Glenn R. Morton described the experiences of those ICR-trained geologists who all suffered "profound crises of faith" when confronted on a daily basis with rock-hard geological evidence that they had been taught did not exist and could not exist or else "Scripture has no meaning."
My Links section used to explicitly include a "Selected Creationists" section. Now it's more implicit with Dr. Allan H. Harvey's essays, Ed, Carl Drews, and Glenn R. Morton.
And there was also Bill Morgan, a local creationist activist. An atheist acquaintance had encountered him through a pages-long diatribe, to which I responded point-by-point -- basically it was a poor-man's reproduction of Chick Pub's "Big Daddy?". All that Bill Morgan ever responded with was that one single name on a quote was wrong.
That started a 20-year email correspondence. That resulted in a long series of him lying about everything and anything, including vicious personal lies from him. All of which thoroughly condemn all Christians in the eyes of his victims.
ABE: Of course, one could protest, declaring him to be that "one bad apple", Christians aren't perfect, don't condemn us all because of one bad experience, etc. True enough, except that he's not the only "bad apple", but rather most of the creationists we encounter behave like him; he's just one of the more extreme examples.
But the main problem that I see is that the creationist and fundamentalist communities not only tolerate creationist misconduct and dishonesty, but they actually encourage it.
Edited by dwise1, : Added to last sentence, followed by ABE section
Thanks, my email is posted on my profile, please send the PDF.
Your arguments seem to be pretty standard, at least as far as this post goes. As a YEC I take the position that there's no way to answer those because we can't see that far into the past to be sure things were the same (uniformitarian assumption).
So my approach is to make other arguments that I think are as good in favor of YEC. I really do think they are, and that weighs against those that have apparently persuaded you.
You any kin to Moses? pun intended Welcome to EvC.
The Old Earth "book" is actually an excerpt from my main book. I make my case using: 1. Living organisms older than 4,500 years (the supposed date of the Nochaic flood), with many much older than 6,000 years.
Why not just use what the Hebrew text says.
The universe and earth are a lot older than anyone on this site believes it is.
But maybe you can correct my thinking about what the Word says.
I read in Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning" no one has ever been able to tell me when the beginning was. Some scientist tell me it was 20 billion years ago. Some have reached a consensus of 13.7 billion years ago. Not too many years ago they were telling me it was about 8 billion years ago.
I have made the statement in other threads I believe the heavens and the earth have always existed just not in the form we see it today. Einstein was right it is eternal.
There is some kind of stupid rule that energy cannot be created or destroyed. In fact I read in Scientific America, "The conservation of energy is an absolute law".
Then Alan Guth comes along and gives us cosmic inflation and the inflationary universe. In which all energy needed to create the universe passed through a phase of exponential expansion soon after the Big Bang that was driven by a positive vacuum energy density.
Now we got a zero energy universe.
That has to be held together by some unknown energy that we don't know what it is so we call it dark energy.
Maybe you can clue me in to what existed at T=0 that 1 billionth of a second was that expanding universe. Nobody has ever been able to explain to me where whatever that was began to exist as there was an absence of anything.
So it would be nice if someone could come along and make sense of all this.
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."