Yes fundies are clearly compelled to adhere rigidly to the commandments, meaning that bearing false witness against their neighbours is forbidden rather than not simply bearing false witness. God is perhaps the only possible entity that they can lie about, or for, without, in their minds, risking damnation.
Yes fundies are clearly compelled to adhere rigidly to the commandments, meaning that bearing false witness against their neighbours is forbidden rather than not simply bearing false witness. God is perhaps the only possible entity that they can lie about or for without risking damnation.
One aspect of fundamentalism is not to think for yourself, simply obey to the letter. That of course leaves no scope to regard Genesis in an allegorical way and six days is six days of 24 hours, come hell or high water.
One aspect of fundamentalism is not to think for yourself, simply obey to the letter. That of course leaves no scope to regard Genesis in an allegorical way and six days is six days of 24 hours, come hell or high water.
I feel confident that with time and counseling, you'll get over it. :thumb:
Nope. Fundamentalism means to stick with the fundamentals. The Bible says "six days." When you can show that this is impossible, you will have something with which to accuse.One aspect of fundamentalism is not to think for yourself, simply obey to the letter. That of course leaves no scope to regard Genesis in an allegorical way and six days is six days of 24 hours, come hell or high water.
Meanwhile, the Bible says "six days." Your insistence on "billions of years" puts you at odds with God's word.
:mock: Morons
Better to stand for something than be wishy washy though, eh?
Better to stand for something than be wishy washy though, eh?
Better to stand for something than be wishy washy though, eh?
My accusation is that any ancient scripture can be deemed as infallible and adhered to if empirical evidence can always be dismissed should it ever seem to contradict it.
We know.
We know. :wave2:
Meanwhile, the Bible says "six days." You say: "billions of years." When you've chosen one of those mutually exclusive positions, you might be able to join a rational discussion.
:wave2:
I think you and I have fundamentally different understandings of some aspects of Carbon dating. Specifically, you mention “how fast C-13 decays”. It doesn’t. It is stable. (And relatively rare as compared to C-12, abundant as compared to C-14).
BTW, I often see asterisks at various places in your posts, such as the ones after “agree.”, “C14 “, and “also.” Are those significant, or are they just an artifact of some software quirk as your posts flow from your computer to mine?
An old earth would not prove evolution, but a recently created earth would effectively disprove it.
This is an example of why it is a bit frustrating communicating with you, Michael. Several days ago I authored a moderately long post showing that the energies released in powerful high explosives involve nothing more than energy changes associated with the orbiting electrons in the atoms. In a couple of posts since then I have had to point that out again as you suggested ways that decay rates might be corrupted. But no, here you are again, right back at square one, as though I had not explained it at all. This is a pretty clear indication that presenting you with detailed scientific explanations is a fruitless waste of both of our times. I guess I can hope that the broader readership of this thread reaps the understanding that you have failed to garner. Anyway, I am going to scale back my efforts to try to give you a scientific understanding of some of the issues that arise in this thread.