|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Why I am creationist | |||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4156 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
I'm sort of wondering the same thing Ned.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Maestro232 Inactive Member |
quote: Ahh.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4156 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
Because of course otherwise your concept would be illogical (if I have understood how you have used the term, because people generally never me it in the same way or in terms of proposition,premise,proposal etc).
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Someone has got to step into this place every now and again and try to wake you guys up. God says you are without excuse. He uses sinful losers like me to sufficiently remind you that He is out their calling for you to recognize His omnipotence. Well thank the sweet baby jesus you came. I, for one, was damned to the eternal pit before you came along to tell us that you don't know exactly what we believe is true, but you do know it's wrong. My soul was crying out for redemption. And now you have delivered it. All praise be to God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4156 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
Sorry I got lost a while back - why is it we should believe in Zeus?
or was it Allah? If you could just narrow it to say 50 possible gods, that would be a start.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
It is quite proper to speak of science as a practice - andto say that science as a method frequently relies on inference to the best explanation.
And what you seek to write off as a mere opinion is a fact. Creationism has utterly failed to explain these things in the full sense of explanation required by science. Evolution, on the other, hand explains - for instance - why remote islands have their own unique species, why taxonomy forms as neat a hierarchy as it does and why we found so many transitional fossils like icthyostega or ambulocetus. Creationism doesn't predict any of that - God can put species wherever He wills. God can create as He wills and there need be no convenient pattern. And there is certainly no need to find fossils indicating links between seperately created species.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Maestro232 writes: Someone has got to step into this place every now and again and try to wake you guys up. God says you are without excuse. He uses sinful losers like me to sufficiently remind you that He is out their calling for you to recognize His omnipotence. Have you any idea how pathetic that sounds? And lame too: if God is omnipotent, then why can't he yell loud enough to wake us up properly? I do agree with one thing you said, though: you're a loser. We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Maestro writes:
But if no man comes to God unless the Spirit draws them, no amount of logic will ever convince a scientist to refute their belief in logic. Theologians should stay away from science. It is like parents going to a rap concert and acting cool. To convince anyone in this forum that there is a Creator, you must attempt to get to know them, get along with them, and trust that the Spirit will draw them towards Him. No amount of logic will ever supercede the established science of our current time.(Unless it is better science, not theological stew.)
But, just the same, if you are really, truly interested in why I think the whole of scientific data in general suggests a creator, I am willing to post an abbreviated statement here.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
AdminPhat Inactive Member |
Parasomnium writes: We are not 12, nor are we on the playground. Lets play nicely, kids!
I do agree with one thing you said, though: you're a loser.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
tsig Member (Idle past 2937 days) Posts: 738 From: USA Joined: |
Seems like your entire response is "I trust the bible as trustworthy."
We knew that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
tsig Member (Idle past 2937 days) Posts: 738 From: USA Joined: |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nosy,Someone has got to step into this place every now and again and try to wake you guys up. God says you are without excuse. He uses sinful losers like me to sufficiently remind you that He is out their calling for you to recognize His omnipotence. Thanks for damming us all to hell. Until you said those words I was blissfully ignorant of god, but your words struck deep in my soul and I knew God. I'm too deep in sin to change so I'll just stay in god-denial and enjoy my lusts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
Calling him a loser is playing it nicely. I merely repeated something he said about himself. Besides, this is the 'Free For All' forum where it says:
quote: But, if you really must, I think you should have admonished him first, for calling us "without excuse". He doesn't know the first thing about us, yet he tells us God says we are without excuse. The presumption! We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins
|
|||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5936 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
Maestro
He is out their calling for you to recognize His omnipotence Tell you what Maestro.You bring god to the playing field in person and I will kick his ass. But I bet you will find he doesn't answer that prayer eh? Omnipotent but unable is pretty lame.How about asking him to walk the walk? A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?' This raised his doubts to such a pitch He fell distracted in the ditch Not knowing how to run.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Either or both could theoretically be riddled with lies or false assumptions that led to an avalanche of more false assumptions. And that's kind of the crux, isn't it? If I don't trust what Gould said about the fossils, I can go look at them myself and attempt to fit them into a pattern of my own devising. On the other hand, if I don't trust (say) the author of the Gospel of John, who do I talk to? What recourse do I have? Absolutely none.
I am not convinced that the fossil record is accurately interpreted as some scientists interpret it when they consider lower layers as older higher layers as newer and everything in between creating a nice continuum of age. With very rare geological exceptions, that that is lower must be older than that that is higher, because you can't lay a geologic strata on something that isn't there yet. I would think this would be obvious. How much older, or younger, is indeed the question. But the relative age is unquestionable, except where it's obvious that the layers have been folded by geologic forces.
This is clearly subjective analysis of the data There's actually nothing in the least subjective about molecular phylogenetics. It's as precise, rigorous, and mathematical as calculating the position of a falling stone.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I think that the whole of scientific observation has shown things decay and become more chaotic. You've never seen a crystal?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024