Started By
Message
re: Jesus is so real guys!! Merry Christmas!!!
Posted on 12/27/19 at 11:59 pm to prevatt33b
Posted on 12/27/19 at 11:59 pm to prevatt33b
The 7-day sequence of Creation depicted in the Book of Genesis actually aligns quite well with the sequence depicted by scientific theory and evidence. The only outstanding difference is the timespan -- 7 days vs. billions of years. Though some refuse to consider that perhaps the 7 days shouldn't be taken literally, I don't quibble over it. The timespan of God's Creation of the Universe, whether it's 7 days or billions of years, doesn't affect my Faith in the Trinity at all -- because either way, it's ALL still absolutely miraculous!
This post was edited on 12/28/19 at 4:27 pm
1
Posted on 12/28/19 at 12:15 am to TidalSurge1
It does line up pretty good, which is particularly impressive given that the author or authors of Genesis weren't writing it for the purposes of withstanding long-term scientific scrutiny.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 12:20 am to prevatt33b
Also, if any poster on this website was tasked with writing a short poetic homage to God himself, and oh, the topic is "all of creation from the beginning to now", I'm confident that I could shoot some scientific holes in the result.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 12:50 am to prevatt33b
You can’t argue that a lack of transitional fossils is because there aren’t enough fossils preserved and that the lack of fossils proves that transitional fossils exist. That would be circular. In a round about way, that seems to be what you did above.
Researchers have desperately been searching for transitions since Darwin’s time. There are no fossils that have been agreed upon by researchers to show transition. Pilt-down man. Lucy. Archaeopteryx. They all turn out to be frauds or mistaken identifications by overly hopeful researchers. Actually, the list of fraudulent claims and deceptions within evolutionary science’s history is embarrassingly long. For example, not, long ago, text books were still using the Equus as an example of a transitional horse fossil, a matter that has been shown to not be true since the 1920s. There are many more examples willfully included in science texts at every level.
As for the age of the earth, this mostly comes from Lyell’s Uniformitarian theory coupled with observations regarding plate techtonics. However, Uniformitarianism is a theory and can always only be an unprovable theory. It assumes things progressed at a constant rate - which is a HUGE assumption. In fact, catastrophism has traditionally not only been an accepted view of a force for geologic change, but it’s actual reality has been well documented.
I do not buy into long term uniformitarianism. I hold to six day creation by an omnipotent Creator with the power of speaking all things into existence at a moment, coupled with catastrophism, including a world wide flood (which, by the way, most cultures of the world have a mythological account of, lending credence to there having, in fact, been a massive flood event) and then a continual winding down of all things (devolution) including our earth, Sun, universe, mankind, etc.
Again, I have no problem with dinosaurs or Mendellian genetics and breading different types of k9s or felines or peas. I agree that SOTF strengthens animals and can even randomly favor traits that are in a subsection of the same type of animal. This is all observable science and in no way conflicts with the Bible.
Anyway. I appreciate the conversation. I always enjoy talking theology.
By the way, what is your football background?
Researchers have desperately been searching for transitions since Darwin’s time. There are no fossils that have been agreed upon by researchers to show transition. Pilt-down man. Lucy. Archaeopteryx. They all turn out to be frauds or mistaken identifications by overly hopeful researchers. Actually, the list of fraudulent claims and deceptions within evolutionary science’s history is embarrassingly long. For example, not, long ago, text books were still using the Equus as an example of a transitional horse fossil, a matter that has been shown to not be true since the 1920s. There are many more examples willfully included in science texts at every level.
As for the age of the earth, this mostly comes from Lyell’s Uniformitarian theory coupled with observations regarding plate techtonics. However, Uniformitarianism is a theory and can always only be an unprovable theory. It assumes things progressed at a constant rate - which is a HUGE assumption. In fact, catastrophism has traditionally not only been an accepted view of a force for geologic change, but it’s actual reality has been well documented.
I do not buy into long term uniformitarianism. I hold to six day creation by an omnipotent Creator with the power of speaking all things into existence at a moment, coupled with catastrophism, including a world wide flood (which, by the way, most cultures of the world have a mythological account of, lending credence to there having, in fact, been a massive flood event) and then a continual winding down of all things (devolution) including our earth, Sun, universe, mankind, etc.
Again, I have no problem with dinosaurs or Mendellian genetics and breading different types of k9s or felines or peas. I agree that SOTF strengthens animals and can even randomly favor traits that are in a subsection of the same type of animal. This is all observable science and in no way conflicts with the Bible.
Anyway. I appreciate the conversation. I always enjoy talking theology.
By the way, what is your football background?
Posted on 12/28/19 at 1:24 am to LovetheLord
quote:
You can’t argue that a lack of transitional fossils is because there aren’t enough fossils preserved and that the lack of fossils proves that transitional fossils exist. That would be circular. In a round about way, that seems to be what you did above.
No, I'm saying there's a shitton of transitional fossils, and I'm also saying it's a fraction of what was.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 1:30 am to LovetheLord
quote:
There are no fossils that have been agreed upon by researchers to show transition.
quote:
They all turn out to be frauds or mistaken identifications by overly hopeful researchers.
This is complete and utter horseshite you've convinced yourself of. It's literal horseshite. You might as well say, "Leprechaun's invented the question mark."
And it's laughable that you think it's true. Laughable. You are saying literally whatever you want and implying it's supported fact.
Surely, you're joking. You cannot be this stupid. No one can be.
EDIT: Please forgive the insult. I'm just aghast that you can be educated enough to speak eloquently and still shockingly ignorant of the facts. It's actually worse that you are not stupid. It's terrifying, actually. And you can vote. I'm horrified.
You are in flat-earther territory with what you've convinced yourself of.
This post was edited on 12/28/19 at 1:38 am
Posted on 12/28/19 at 1:43 am to LovetheLord
quote:
By the way, what is your football background?
Changing the subject, I just played and loved football my whole life, and was HS All-state and a G5 or so level talent. Had a cup of coffee at the college level, gave it up because my scholarship was academic. Studied the sport at length, wish I could go back and be a GA and go into coaching, if I could do it over again. Bigtime DC would have been my ultimate goal.
Answering your question another way, my personal experience and expertise lies in the Wishbone, Pro, and I-form running games and the old 5-2 defensively. Some 4-4, but we didn't have the athletes for it. Played both ways Mike LB/Fullback - preferred defense and have always viewed the game through that lens, but actually played FB at the collegiate level briefly. FB and therefore RB was a second love after ILB. (Pitching in baseball was my mistress.)
Why do you ask?
This post was edited on 12/28/19 at 2:27 am
Posted on 12/28/19 at 1:47 am to LovetheLord
quote:
I always enjoy talking theology.
For the record, we barely discussed theology. We discussed what's scientific fact quite a bit, which has almost nothing to do with theology.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 4:15 am to prevatt33b
Sorry, one more for the record: all fossils are "transitional".
Every. Single. One.
There are no static archetypes. The groupings are a creation of man for the purpose of organizing the study of life. Even a cursory investigation into Taxonomy will reveal just how fluid and transitional life is. Some beings fit into nice clear categories - some very much don't. And many straddle the lines between multiple categories. That's why Taxonomy has 7 levels of delineation. It takes splitting hairs to that level to even try to categorize everything that's alive.
Every. Single. One.
There are no static archetypes. The groupings are a creation of man for the purpose of organizing the study of life. Even a cursory investigation into Taxonomy will reveal just how fluid and transitional life is. Some beings fit into nice clear categories - some very much don't. And many straddle the lines between multiple categories. That's why Taxonomy has 7 levels of delineation. It takes splitting hairs to that level to even try to categorize everything that's alive.
This post was edited on 12/28/19 at 4:24 am
Posted on 12/28/19 at 5:17 am to LukeSidewalker
Good on you buddy. I have a strong feeling time is running out at least most all signs point to that.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 5:53 am to prevatt33b
quote:
I do not agree with this statement at all. Christ's "Saviorness" doesn't hinge on Man having done it to himself, and I see no Biblical reason for believing such.
There's plenty of biblical evidence suggesting the Fall of Man brought death and suffering into a world that was once considered ideal.
Fall of Man
Garden of Eden
quote:
On this topic, this is the problem I have: The earth's physical makeup and its age can be tested. The half-life of radio-isotopes can date most things, and it's simply a fact that the earth has existed for 4.5 billion years or so, life in some form has existed for 3.7 billion or little more, and humans indistinguishable from us have existed for more than 100,000 years.
I'm an atheist. Of course I agree with the standard geological timeline. I just don't think it's compatible with Christianity because, in my opinion, death before sin doesn't make sense theologically.
Think of it this way: If you were on a nice cruise ship, got drunk, fell overboard, and someone noticed you and helped save you, you would be very thankful to that person, wouldn't you? That makes sense. But what if you were on that same ship (just walking around minding your own business) and someone intentionally pushed you off the ship and wouldn't help you until you pleaded for it? That person would come across as an a-hole, wouldn't he?
Well, that's the way I see the Fall of Man. For the sacrifice of Christ to make sense theologically... for us to ultimately be at fault for things like cancer, birth defects, hurricanes, extreme temperatures, etc... there has to have been a point in time when the world was void of all that and we fricked up.
In a world in which evolution is true, it's not our fault that we suffer and die. Animals did it for hundreds of millions of years before our first human ancestors arrived to join in the struggle. This has been a harsh world from the very beginning and it can't be blamed on Man because even when we were innocent (as we had to have been at some point) death was there.
quote:
And you want to say that all of these mountains of facts are "not true" based on your interpretation of some of the scripture written thousand of years ago, written in half-poetic form, and definitely edited over the millenia since written? Give me a break.
I'm saying they are true. It's the theology that doesn't make sense.
quote:
There's no insult to man or God that humans have a common biological ancestor with chimpanzees, or even alligators. As a matter of fact, it makes the story of creation all the more grandiose.
No, it doesn't.
quote:
Gave him a soul/spirit and loved him special.
Loved us special in what way? By putting us in an environment in which mere survival was a daily struggle?
quote:
Why must some Christians pursue an explanation for life that doesn't agree with the universe you live in and that you say God himself created?
Why must some Christian twist scripture into a pretzel to try to save a theological argument that doesn't make any sense? Is it because you're too afraid to let the whole thing go, acknowledge that it's nonsense (like countless other religions) and that death is both final and inevitable, and just enjoy the life you do have?
quote:
If I'm stuck in a huge hole and gonna die, my rescue and my opinion of the rescuer won't change if it's my fault I'm in the hole or not. I'm just in a hole and gonna die. Why ain't important anymore. I'm just real thankful to the one guy who got me out - cause I was screwed without that dude.
Ah, this is just like my cruise ship analogy. What if the rescuer pushed you in that hole and then wanted you to plead for his help? That's bullshite, isn't it? Without a legitimate Fall of Man, this is exactly what you're looking at theologically.
We don't suffer and die because we disobeyed God. We suffer and die because we were born into a harsh world but for some reason God wants us to call to Jesus so that we can be spared from circumstances that He put us in.
That makes no sense.
quote:
But FYI, I believe the Adam and Eve story to be allegorical, not literal, and I do not believe the entire earth flooded with Noah. However, a massive local flood of Noah's region is supported by archaeological evidence, and the entire "world" of the author would have been flooded, hence his use of the word "world" or whatever. It's literally not possible that Noah and his family got 2 of every animal ON EARTH on one boat. Just literally not possible. Could he have gotten 2 of every meaningful animal from his region on one really massive boat? I don't see why not.
It's not possible that a human being did all the things Jesus supposedly did. Maybe that was allegorical too.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 8:57 am to Globetrotter747
Some in this thread are placing human constraints on an omnipotent God - time, for example. God is not bound by time as we are. A thousand years is as a day, and a day is as a thousand years to God. Each of the six days of creation (He rested on the seventh day) may have been a billion "human" years... and yes, God did simply speak the universe into creation ("poofed," as another poster so eloquently put it). The Bible says God created man in His own image, and I don't believe God is or was a monkey.
Not all will believe in this life, but ALL will eventually meet and bow before the Almighty God. I pray you are ready for that meeting.
Not all will believe in this life, but ALL will eventually meet and bow before the Almighty God. I pray you are ready for that meeting.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 9:02 am to prevatt33b
Have you actually studied this issue? When you say things like, there are a s-ton of transitional fossils” you sound like you just googled some information quickly. Furthermore, when you say “all fossils are transitional” you really have stepped off the ledge.
I have studied this matter a great deal and I have read a lot of stuff from people with incredible minds and knowledge. I didn’t just do a quick search for “Transitional fossils”, come up with Archaeopteryx, and say, “Oh. There you go.” I searched deeper a found that even within those who dearly wish that they could locate a transitional fossil, they reject Archaeopteryx as a transitional fossil. I have looked at the other supposed transitional fossils, and they fall apart under scrutiny.
I would suggest that you are projecting your short comings on to me, and that it is you who are desperately trying to convince yourself of something. In this case, that evolution is factual. Perhaps you are just blithely trusting what others who make appeals to authority are telling you. I, however, know what I am talking about.
I tell you what. We could go on with awkwardly pedantic points about whether or not we have discussed theology. You could continue to impute motives upon me. You could put forth previously debunked evidences and arguments and I could spend time telling you differently, but I have a church and a family to manage and cannot devote that sort of time. Furthermore, trying to type a lot of stuff on an iPad is a real pain. But, most notably, here are dozens of good books that have already been written that address your arguments and I don’t need to reinvent the wheel. Therefore, I challenge you to read Darwin on Trial. It was written by Philip Johnson, a tenured law professor at Stanford law school - a real idiot. If you want more, there are books by men who are cell biologists, chemical biologists and more. If you want a secularist’s perspective read Tom Wolfe’s Kingdom of Speech. Wolfe states that evolution is a house of cards being propped up by a jihad pronounced by the clergy of the religion of secularism to attack and destroy all who question.
I don’t want to hear a regurgitation from some goofball’s blog about how stupid and silly they say the books are, I can tell when that is happening. Read the books yourself. For a quick and easy primmer, watch Ben Stein’s Expelled. Stein is not young earth creationist. Not even a Christian, but he is smart enough to call BS. (He has a 150 IQ).
Anyway. Have a good one and a happy New Year and Roll Tide.
I have studied this matter a great deal and I have read a lot of stuff from people with incredible minds and knowledge. I didn’t just do a quick search for “Transitional fossils”, come up with Archaeopteryx, and say, “Oh. There you go.” I searched deeper a found that even within those who dearly wish that they could locate a transitional fossil, they reject Archaeopteryx as a transitional fossil. I have looked at the other supposed transitional fossils, and they fall apart under scrutiny.
I would suggest that you are projecting your short comings on to me, and that it is you who are desperately trying to convince yourself of something. In this case, that evolution is factual. Perhaps you are just blithely trusting what others who make appeals to authority are telling you. I, however, know what I am talking about.
I tell you what. We could go on with awkwardly pedantic points about whether or not we have discussed theology. You could continue to impute motives upon me. You could put forth previously debunked evidences and arguments and I could spend time telling you differently, but I have a church and a family to manage and cannot devote that sort of time. Furthermore, trying to type a lot of stuff on an iPad is a real pain. But, most notably, here are dozens of good books that have already been written that address your arguments and I don’t need to reinvent the wheel. Therefore, I challenge you to read Darwin on Trial. It was written by Philip Johnson, a tenured law professor at Stanford law school - a real idiot. If you want more, there are books by men who are cell biologists, chemical biologists and more. If you want a secularist’s perspective read Tom Wolfe’s Kingdom of Speech. Wolfe states that evolution is a house of cards being propped up by a jihad pronounced by the clergy of the religion of secularism to attack and destroy all who question.
I don’t want to hear a regurgitation from some goofball’s blog about how stupid and silly they say the books are, I can tell when that is happening. Read the books yourself. For a quick and easy primmer, watch Ben Stein’s Expelled. Stein is not young earth creationist. Not even a Christian, but he is smart enough to call BS. (He has a 150 IQ).
Anyway. Have a good one and a happy New Year and Roll Tide.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 9:19 am to prevatt33b
quote:
Just look at the fossil record of Man. There's no "missing link." What there is, is fossil after fossil of included-not-missing link after link after LINK of the gradual transition of beings to get to what we are today. The transition is clear as day and supported by the associated archaeological evidence of the gradual increase in intelligence, from basic tool-making 2 million years ago to the domestication of fire and ritualistic burying of the dead 500,00 years ago. It's all plain as day if you look at it.
Much easier to say than physically substantiate.
For instance, there should be fish fins changing into amphibian legs with feet and toes, you should see the fossil record of gills changing into lungs. There should be reptiles with front limbs changing into bird wings back limbs changing into legs with claws, scales changing into feathers, and mouths changing into horny beaks, to just name a few things on evolutionary "transitional" fossil lists around the globe.
What you got Mr. Paleontologist?
This post was edited on 12/28/19 at 9:21 am
Posted on 12/28/19 at 10:20 am to bamameister
quote:
What you got Mr. Paleontologist?
This wasn't addressed to me, but I have something to say in response to this question.
Science is hard work. Sifting through billions of years of geological history to discover minute details is excruciatingly tedious and time consuming and answers come slowly.
"God did it" is easy work and a tool for the lazy and ignorant. Anyone can use magic to fill in the gaps of their knowledge. (Can't find your keys anywhere? Maybe a gremlin stole them.) It's for people who want to have all the answers right now while ignoring the fact that attributing what we don't know to deities has been foolish and premature since the beginning of human thought. The history of science has shown us what we don't know today likely will be answered in the future in a naturalistic way.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 10:43 am to Globetrotter747
quote:
This wasn't addressed to me, but I have something to say in response to this question.
Science is hard work. Sifting through billions of years of geological history to discover minute details is excruciatingly tedious and time consuming and answers come slowly.
"God did it" is easy work and a tool for the lazy and ignorant. Anyone can use magic to fill in the gaps of their knowledge. (Can't find your keys anywhere? Maybe a gremlin stole them.) It's for people who want to have all the answers right now while ignoring the fact that attributing what we don't know to deities has been foolish and premature since the beginning of human thought. The history of science has shown us what we don't know today likely will be answered in the future in a naturalistic way.
If I attack the silliness of evolution, based on real physical evidence, no one should assume I'm not well aware of the silliness of many different and contradictive religious doctrine. But as they say, two wrongs have never gotten it right, you know? If 2 men sit in a room to discuss two extreme points of view, it's not mandatory to assume one or the other is correct. The fact is, truth is hard to come by. No one is going to accidentally trip over it.
Besides, religion didn't prove evolution to be factually wrong, scientists did all the heavy lifting.
Science isn't being dismissed by me for all the "cause and effect" that has been proven and substantiated over time. But "real" science has absolutely nothing to do with the foolish, kindergarten theories associated with evolution.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 11:00 am to bamameister
quote:
Besides, religion didn't prove evolution to be factually wrong, scientists did all the heavy lifting.
I'm curious as to your explanation for the origin and diversity of life on Earth. Would you kindly share it with us? In detail, please.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 11:16 am to Globetrotter747
Hey, easy now. All the “Goddidit” mockery stuff is nothing more than, “I don't like what you say about evolution/atheism, etc., so I wave off your arguments as easy believism” and it is the definition of intellectual laziness. I can likewise say that “Timeandrandomchancedidit” is your tool of ignorance and laziness and simply a secular form of easy believism.
TOE has some very serious issues that even it’s most ardent supporters will acknowledge. “Scientists are hard at work finding evidence to prop up their ideas” is scientifically lazy. No where else are scientists allowed to state something as fact and then look for corroborating evidence. The fact is, there are a lot of fossils, but they all come to us fully formed. Out of all the trillions of mutations needed to reach even a small beneficial change, we ought to have something. The odds would be overwhelmingly more likely that a fossil WOULD show signs of transition than not. But here we stand, against all odds, with not just limited exhibits, but zero.
The whole universe shows us devolution not evolution. The universe is winding DOWN and falling apart. The sun is dying. The earth is dying. Over time it will stop spinning. Leave a VW out in the elements and it will fall apart, not turn into a Mercedes. Mankind grows old and dies. Why is it we suddenly think that nature and time is supposed to improve animals into better ones when it destroys everything else?
As for my keys, I never think that a gremlin stole them. I know that I have misplaced them. Perhaps you have run across some other religions that believe such, but if you are attributing such to Christianity then you need to seriously re-examine what you know about It.
As to earlier cultures and deities to solve the unknown. Go grab some history books. People of old were no more gullible or stupid than we are. The argument could be made that the average person was less so.
Abram, father of Judaism- from Ur of Chaldea. The Chaldeans were part of the first people to study astronomy, recognizing the patterns and the constellations and establishing a celestial calendar. Ever studied ancient Babylon? Or Egypt. You really think those people were stupid troglodytes? I visited the Pompey exhibit. It looked as though the archaeologists had pull stuff right out of modern history. The tools, the glass wares, the etched spoons. Friend, these people would be impressed by our air travel and electricity and that is about it.
If you can name a great scientist of the Enlightenment, the overwhelming likelihood is that you will be naming a man who was an orthodox Christian who believed in the infallibility of the Bible, including the creation account and every miracle.
To make the statements you have is, quite frankly, sophomoric.
TOE has some very serious issues that even it’s most ardent supporters will acknowledge. “Scientists are hard at work finding evidence to prop up their ideas” is scientifically lazy. No where else are scientists allowed to state something as fact and then look for corroborating evidence. The fact is, there are a lot of fossils, but they all come to us fully formed. Out of all the trillions of mutations needed to reach even a small beneficial change, we ought to have something. The odds would be overwhelmingly more likely that a fossil WOULD show signs of transition than not. But here we stand, against all odds, with not just limited exhibits, but zero.
The whole universe shows us devolution not evolution. The universe is winding DOWN and falling apart. The sun is dying. The earth is dying. Over time it will stop spinning. Leave a VW out in the elements and it will fall apart, not turn into a Mercedes. Mankind grows old and dies. Why is it we suddenly think that nature and time is supposed to improve animals into better ones when it destroys everything else?
As for my keys, I never think that a gremlin stole them. I know that I have misplaced them. Perhaps you have run across some other religions that believe such, but if you are attributing such to Christianity then you need to seriously re-examine what you know about It.
As to earlier cultures and deities to solve the unknown. Go grab some history books. People of old were no more gullible or stupid than we are. The argument could be made that the average person was less so.
Abram, father of Judaism- from Ur of Chaldea. The Chaldeans were part of the first people to study astronomy, recognizing the patterns and the constellations and establishing a celestial calendar. Ever studied ancient Babylon? Or Egypt. You really think those people were stupid troglodytes? I visited the Pompey exhibit. It looked as though the archaeologists had pull stuff right out of modern history. The tools, the glass wares, the etched spoons. Friend, these people would be impressed by our air travel and electricity and that is about it.
If you can name a great scientist of the Enlightenment, the overwhelming likelihood is that you will be naming a man who was an orthodox Christian who believed in the infallibility of the Bible, including the creation account and every miracle.
To make the statements you have is, quite frankly, sophomoric.
Posted on 12/28/19 at 11:24 am to Globetrotter747
quote:
I'm curious as to your explanation for the origin and diversity of life on Earth. Would you kindly share it with us? In detail, please.
How does that prove or disprove the silliness of evolution? It gets us on a different subject but gets no one closer to the foolish conspiracy of evolution.
As mentioned, Science, long ago, destroyed the mythology of the "simple cell, organic soup, and the fossil record trying to substantiate the "quick" or now more popular "transitional" evolution of man.
That, I have a lot of ideas on, how about you?
Posted on 12/28/19 at 11:27 am to bamameister
Holy shite. I almost forgot that some people don't believe in evolution.
Page 4 of 9
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News