ICANT'S position in the creation debate

As requested by Adminnemooseus"ICANT's position in the creation debate".
My position on the Genesis account of creation. The same light period God created life. I have been told science has proved this story wrong.Science has no evidence concerning how the universe began to exist.Science has no evidence of how life began to exist.Therefore Science has not proved God did not create the universe and life as presented in Genesis. So that story has not been proven false.Now if I am mistaken about the Scientific evidence please present it.God Bless,Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Corrected link target for Adminnemooseus link. It had been 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."

Thread copied here from the ICANT'S position in the creation debate thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

If your entire argument is that it hasn't been proven that a god of some sort did not create the Heavens and the Earth you,ll not find any sane challengers. That makes you a winner, Yeah!The second bit about god blowing noses is a bit more problematic. It has been "proven" to the satisfaction of all but the most perverse that man didn't arise fully formed from dust. Or are you going to resort to this being poetic license. Not a lot of time is spent disproving poems. Violets aren't really blue and no one has made a big deal of that either.The problem is that you know and we know that you'll take the win to be a whole heck of a lot more significant than the nothing that it is. That it can't yes, can't be proven that some sort of god did not in some sort of way create the Universe gives no logical sanction to any of the properties of that god or its ways.

---

It's not the man that knows the most that has the most to say.

What is you opinion on:The age of the universe?The age of the Earth?The age of the first life on Earth?The age of the first human (Homo sapiens)?Do the modern great ages (gorillas, chimps) and modern humans have a common ancestor?Moose{Note to self - The Randman topic, Yec/Not Yec? - A "let's keep it short topic".Edited by Minnemooseus, : Note to self.

So your position is that Genesis 1 contains only one verse, and that Genesis 2 likewise contains only one verse (oddly enough the seventh).Might I suggest that in fact there are more verses and that it is there that the problems lie ?

Hi lyx2no, You can not prove God does not exist.You can prove God did not create the heaven and the earth as is stated in Genesis 1:1.All you have to do to prove Genesis 1:1 to be false is to prove how the universe began to exist. Nothing has been proven.It would be simple to prove Genesis 2:7 to be false.Prove how life began to exist. I did argue on here somewhere if Hawking's instanton was the cause of the universe beginning to exist it would be God.But Genesis 1:1 and 2:7 can be proven to be false.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

What do you mean by "prove"?

Hi Minnemooseus, This presents a problem for me that has not been resolved to my satisfaction yet"You don't know what you are talking about" and "we don't know" just does not satisfy my mind.The Bible says "in the beginning", but I have not been able to find anyone who can tell me when that was. Nor do I have a clue.So I have a universe that is infinite or a universe that began to exist.Now if I listen to my Hebrew instructor my problem is solved. He said the word 'beginning' should have been 'beginning's'.That would solve my problem as there was an eternal light period that had ended in Genesis 1:2 as far as the earth was concerned.The universe could have began to exist anywhere in that eternal light period. The earth could have then begin to exist in the universe whenever it began to exist. According to Genesis 2:7 the first life on earth was mankind before plants, animals or fowls.But your question is when was that? Just like the universe and the earth that life could have began to exist on earth whenever it began to exist by God breathing the breath of life into the form He had made from the dust of the earth.Life already existed it was just imparted to mankind.That could have been anytime in the last couple of billion years + or - whatever. Mankind was the first lifeform on earth according to Genesis 2:7. They all were called forth from their ancestors which was all formed from the dust of the ground by God. So they all came from the same place.Time is only relative to mankind. God is not bound by time therefore He does not give us any time frames to go on.Mankind has tried to make the Bible say things it does not say in order to conform to his/her personal beliefs and worldview.The biggest myth proprogated on this site is that the Bible says the universe began 6000 years ago.Man can figure out in his own mind that Genesis 1:2 was about 6000 years ago by math.But the universe and the earth existed prior to Genesis 1:2. They existed in Genesis 1:1.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

You cannot prove that the invisible pink unicorn, or the flying spaghetti monster does not exist. Why don't you hold them in the same regard?

Hi Paul, whoop te dou. There was no Genesis 1 with any verses until about a 1000 years ago. Until then there was just Genesis.Chapters and verses are mans invention to be able to find things God said.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I think we've all agreed to that about a gazillion times. All gen 1:1 say is Goddidit, so no, one can't. If one "proves" some version of the BBT to be exactly correct in every particular how would that prove that God didn't use that version of the BBT to create the Universe?Now, If Gen 1:1 said "In the beginning God made the Universe out of four different colors of modeling clay and that's why people are indistinguishable from animation figures." then we'd have something to work with. Right, ICANT, we're all just brains in jars. Some jars from Costco, some jars from Gerber."Proven" is your word, ICANT. The Jars from Costco have agreed that epistemologically nothing is "proven". But TJfCs don't need things to be epistemologically proven for them to recognize the best fit to reality. TJfCs recognize a form of "proven" that means "given enough evidence, fitting the evidence without contradiction." TJfCs understand that evidence, like that produced in the Michelson-Morley experiments, might be uncovered that contradicts what they had thought to be proven. TJfCs then scrap or refine their earlier model to incorporate this information into a new model. That's how The Jars from Costco keep their figurative thumbs out of their figurative butts and do useful things. Until such time as you clearly state what Gen 2:7 means there isn't much point in mentioning it. It's gibberish. You don't seem to understand that you have formed in your mind a presumption of its meaning with all its collateral detail that the rest of us haven't. And you would be wrong because word salad does not evidence make."Hawking's instanton" is one of your magic beans that you seem to think make any recipe come out right. Take some cat poo, filbert husks and Hawking intantons and you have a feast the whole family can enjoy. It really doesn't work that way.Edited by lyx2no, : Typo.

---

It's not the man that knows the most that has the most to say.

Hi Straggler, Simply present the evidence of the facts of exactly how the universe began or how life began.That shouldn't be too much of a problem as I have been told science has proved the Genesis story to be false.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

quote:

---

whoop te dou. There was no Genesis 1 with any verses until about a 1000 years ago. Until then there was just Genesis.

​

Chapters and verses are mans invention to be able to find things God said.

---

It is true that the chapter and verse divisions were added later. However that does not change my point that in every Bible I have seen there is considerably more to the pats of Genesis labelled chapter 1 and chapter 2 than a single verse each. Yet your posts implicitly deny the existence of anything more. Please explain why this is.

You do realise that you are in serious god of the gaps terriotory here. Yes? Well which part of Genesis are we talking about specifically? Or does finding evidence contrary to any aspect of the Genesis story invalidate the whole thing?Isn't the flood and the destruction of all humanity in the book of Genesis? I don't want to hijack your thread down that specific route but that one has been pretty conclusively invalidated has it not?

Hi lyx2no, When did the BBT begin to speak about the beginning of the universe?No comment on the babbling.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."