|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why prefer the Biblical creation account over those of other religions? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 395 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined:
|
That's not a problem because he could provide links to those places where he posted such evidence in the past.
The question though is why not prefer much earlier and less contradictory myths?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Panda writes: It is difficult to accept your claim that you have evidence when you have been banned from the science forum because you do not understand what evidence is.I do not know a way forward from this. It is a shame that you couldn't agree a thread proposal with Admin regarding how evidence works. I know full well what evidence is. I go by the Online Dictionary. Admin goes by his own unique EvC version so as not to allow me in science or Biblical Accuracy forums. His version categorically eliminates any evidence relative to the supernatural. Simple as that. The evidence I cited for this thread is real evidence that the Biblical record is THE record. All others have none whatsoever. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3713 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
Buzsaw writes:
And most people in the science forums agree with Admin's definition.
Admin goes by his own unique EvC version so as not to allow me in science or Biblical Accuracy forums. Buzsaw writes:
I still see the massive gap between your idea of evidence and everyone else's. The evidence I cited for this thread is real evidence that the Biblical record is THE record. You claim that a chariot wheel is evidence of THE Exodus - but it is only evidence of there being 1 chariot (and there little evidence that it is even a wheel).It is not evidence of an exodus. While you continue to contend that one footprint is evidence of an army, I have little reason to accept any claims of evidence made by you.Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
quote:This thread is about the creation stories only, not the credibility of the Bible or which god is the true god. The point of this thread is to show why one creation story should be considered true over another. The Baha'is claim that Hindu prophecies have been fulfilled. The Hopi claim to have fulfilled prohecy. Hopi Prophecy And, after four days they gave four of us special permission and appointed us, as High Leaders of all the Hopi spiritual leaders, to be their interpreters, to carry this message to the world because two main important things came about at that time, that through his writings and other ways, the White man would take control of this land, 4 corners and take this land away from us one day, which they did when they passed his law called Indian Land Claim Commission, in 1946. Then another thing that White man is going to invent is what we refer to as the gourd rattle; we use it in our ceremony; a small thing but it will be so hot and so powerful that if White man invents this and lets it erupt on earth, it will burn everything to ashes. That is exactly what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and to them, those two main prophecies had become fulfilled in those days, so they met and selected us to go out and tell the world never to make that atom bomb again because once you do that sooner or later you’re going to destroy yourself and the whole world. More than one culture claims fulfilled prophecies.More than one culture has historical records. This doesn't tell me why one creation story should be considered true and another false. This is not a science thread. Don't get sucked into the same old arguments. If you're going to participate in this thread, you need to provide reasoned argumentation and the OP of this thread requested empirical evidence. If you've already done this elsewhere and don't wish to provide it here or at least a link, then you shouldn't be participating in this debate. IMO, every thread is a new beginning. We bring our arguments and evidence to the thread. Check the old baggage at the door. Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
Please check your old baggage at the door. IOW, don't bring old arguments and off topic arguments to this thread.
This is the religious forum. Reasoned argumentation is required here and not so much scientific evidence. I'm not in Moderator mode because I really would like to participate in this debate. So I'm asking, pleading, begging you all to stop dragging in old arguments and requests. Stop with the short demands. Present an argument based on the position presented. Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Panda writes: And most people in the science forums agree with Admin's definition. LOL, Panda. No wonder. His EvC unique and exclusive definition aids and abets the majority view's ideology while censoring and silencing that of their creationist counterparts.
Panda writes: I still see the massive gap between your idea of evidence and everyone else's.You claim that a chariot wheel is evidence of THE Exodus - but it is only evidence of there being 1 chariot (and there little evidence that it is even a wheel). It is not evidence of an exodus. When you or some secularist researcher falsify scientist Moller's research, get back to us. You need also to falsify all of the corroborating evidence which was cited before your charge is justified. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
PD writes: quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This thread is about the creation stories only, not the credibility of the Bible or which god is the true god.The point of this thread is to show why one creation story should be considered true over another. My point went right over your head, PD, being that the more corroborated evidence for the record at large, the more credibility to parts and parcels of the whole.
The Baha'is claim that Hindu prophecies have been fulfilled. The Hopi claim to have fulfilled prohecy. Hopi Prophecy
Your strawman analogy does not qualify as anything significant. It is more of looking in retrospect than prophecy. Biblical prophecies, supportive to the Biblical record AT LARGE are far more significant, involving specific phenomenal fulfillments centuries out in the future, involving many nations. Case in point would be the phenomenal restoration of the scattered Jews back to restore their ancient nation. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined:
|
quote:I understood your point, but I don't feel that's a valid argument because the Bible is made up of many types of writings. Some are fiction and some are factual. Just because a factual account in a non fiction book is accurate doesn't make the fictional story a true account. It might make a nice case for your own reasons for believing, but it isn't an argument that holds up to outside examination, which is what the OP is asking for. quote:It doesn't matter whether it is significant or not. Other cultures have prophecies that they claim came true. That has no bearing on their creation story. It's pretty standard that one religion claims the other is false. That's probably why the originator asked for empirical evidence. Something we can both look at and see that it's true. I don't see any connection between validity of prophecies with validity of a creation story. What is false about the Hopi creation story?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wollysaurus Member (Idle past 4492 days) Posts: 52 From: US Joined:
|
Buz,
Perhaps you could propose a thread on the fulfillment of prophecy in the Bible, and how that helps to validate the work as a whole in your mind. It could be an interesting topic to debate and give everyone better insight into where you are coming from without drifting the thread too much. But I think in general the idea that if the concept of natural selection were disproven tomorrow that this would somehow validate the biblical view of creation (or any other, for that matter) is false. If it were to happen, other sciences such as cosmology, physics, chemistry would not be affected at all. Whether or not the diversity of life on this planet is evolved from a common ancestor or ancestors is of no consequence to the age/structure of the earth, solar system, galaxy... You get the picture. Proponents of a young earth, at least, would be no better off. Those who regard life as having a divine origin in general might think they would win in the end, at least in regards to the origin of species, but that is only within the context of the false dichotomy of "evolution or God" which establishes the false premise that there are only two options. But speaking hypothetically, if it *had* to be one of the creation myths out there, my money would be on something that had a better ring of truth in the plain nature of the text (without the agonizing interpretation of the apologist). From Ovid:
quote: Note a few points I put in bold here. What you could argue as a rudimentary description of gravity. The earth is unquestionably spherical. A description of the planet's general characteristics, complete with polar caps. This is the story born of a people with a degree of learning. I'd put my money on the Greco-Roman tradition if forced to choose, if only because it doesn't strike me quite so much as the traditions of a tribal desert people who really didn't understand much about the world around them. The God of the old testament isn't so different from the Greco-Roman gods, you know; he interferes in wars, hardens hearts, meddles in nation building, is jealous of other gods receiving worship. It's also interesting to note that the Roman account doesn't claim to know who exactly created everything - "a god and a greater order of nature" bringing an end to the chaos of the primordial time. source: UVA Library
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chuck77 Inactive Member |
purpledawn writes: Then what was your point in posting in this thread? Well, here is what I saw the OP saying when I posted:
Why prefer the Biblical creation account over those of other religions? Do I need to address every Creation myth? Or some of the more relevant religions?
The point is what makes the Biblical account of creation the true story over others? Well, I know first hand it's true from my own experience. I can offer my testiomonies and God working in my own life. Since the OP says you cannot use the Bible it's a bit restricted as our faith is based on what the Bible says.
The OP isn't talking about the religions that evolved from Judaism. The Shinto and Hindus are two examples given. Well, I just went with what the OP actually said and cited hindu which it said and religions. Are we now addressing all the Creation myths you linked from wiki?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chuck77 Inactive Member |
So you did not read the link PD supplied? I glanced at it yes. Do I have to address everyone? The OP is talking about religions (i.e hinduism etc.) not what the bushman in the congo believe. Isnt that moving the goalposts so to speak? Am I allowed to say that or only you at your convienince? My first comment to this thread was addressing the OP and certain religions like hinduism and I did, not the 900 beliefs in the wiki article. Pay attention.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3458 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined:
|
The key question in Message 1 deals with the type of evidence asked for by the originator.
What empirical evidence is there that proves the biblical creation story true and/or the other stories false. As I said before, the originator is looking for evidence all can see and examine. In your discussion with me, I will let you quote the Bible all you want, but I think I can safely say, it won't tell us the creation stories are true. Even the Jews know the stories are foundational myths.
quote:What testimonies do you have concerning the creation story? Your own experiences aren't evidence that anyone else can experience. God works in the lives of many Christians, but they don't all consider the creation stories to be factual. Here is a quote from one of the early church fathers, Origen. He does not consider the creation stories to be factual events.
De Principiis (Book IV) by Origen, one of the early church fathers.
16. ... Now who is there, pray, possessed of understanding, that will regard the statement as appropriate, that the first day, and the second, and the third, in which also both evening and morning are mentioned, existed without sun, and moon, and stars the first day even without a sky? And who is found so ignorant as to suppose that God, as if He had been a husbandman, planted trees in paradise, in Eden towards the east, and a tree of life in it, i.e., a visible and palpable tree of wood, so that anyone eating of it with bodily teeth should obtain life, and, eating again of another tree, should come to the knowledge of good and evil? No one, I think, can doubt that the statement that God walked in the afternoon in paradise, and that Adam lay hid under a tree, is related figuratively in Scripture, that some mystical meaning may be indicated by it. ... Just because God has made a difference in your life, doesn't mean the creation story is true. I would say that most people would say their religion has an impact on their life. Does that make their creation story true?
quote:We are trying to address why the Judeo/Christian creation stories are considered true, but other creation stories are false. All the subjective evidence so far for accepting the Judeo/Christian creation stories as true can also be used by others to say their creation story is true. To deem the Judeo/Christian creation stories as true above all others, there needs to be evidence that all can see and experience in the same way. We already know you prefer it because it is part of your religion, but so far, you haven't shown me why I should consider your creation story any more true than any other creation story.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Butterflytyrant Member (Idle past 4422 days) Posts: 415 From: Australia Joined:
|
Hey Purple Dawn,
Even the Jews know the stories are foundational myths. You are lucky IamJoseph is suspended. That line would have started quite a rant. With regards to considering the validity of all creation myths, you can fairly quickly strike most of them off the list. Although I find all creation myths difficult to swallow, a large number are impossible. Usually for one of two (sometimes both) reasons. 1. They involve situations that are just plain ridiculous. example. - A Japanese creation myth advises that the islands of Japan were created from the ejaculation of one god when he pulled out while having sex with the underworld.(Source : 6 Wacky Creation Myths Around the World - Matador Network) 2. There is something major in the myth that should be visable today that is not there, thus disproving the myth. example - This particular Hindu creation myth. I believe that the first exploreres in space would have been quite surprised to see the world sitting on elephants who were in turn standing on a giant turtle.
Some creation stories are far more likely than others. Even if that likelyhood is still remote. The monotheistic creation stories are far more believable than the two examples. Not all creation myths are made equal.I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot "Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 395 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
chuck writes: The point is what makes the Biblical account of creation the true story over others? Well, I know first hand it's true from my own experience. I can offer my testiomonies and God working in my own life. Since the OP says you cannot use the Bible it's a bit restricted as our faith is based on what the Bible says. A couple question. Since we know from direct evidence that the Biblical Creation Stories are factually wrong, for example in the order of things created, what possible personal experiences could refute direct evidence?Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7
|
So you are not going to address the meat of my post at all?
The sentence you quoted was just the last comment of the post. Pay attention. You are still standing by this comment?
Chuckie writes: most creation stories steal from the bible. You have provided absolutely nothing to back up this assertion. You should to stay away from terms like "most", unless you have strong evidence. Words like that can bite you in the ass. Now you throw in hinduism. Does hinduism steal its creation acount from the bible? If so, please show.Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024