Creation vs. Evolution

[StanJ]

Yes, and Mounties too, and lumberjacks, I feel a song coming on...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg

I just don't do blind faith Stan.
I also don't credulously believe that an ancient scripture is anything more than that, an ancient scripture. If however God's word comes more directly to you then good for you.

First of all, faith is NOT blind, and I DO.
The Bible is how God effectively and arbitrarily communicates His will to believers. That way no ONE person can say "God told me", which still sadly happens.

I don't therefore accept that putting an ancient scripture to the test would be the same as putting God to the test.

Jesus said "IT IS WRITTEN" a total of 31 times in the Gospels, and it is used another 47 times in the rest of the NT, so yes it is established and important to see what God's Word has to say about ANYTHING!

Science is allowed to be wrong, it expects to be wrong sometimes, so it's rather up to the individual to conclude from the evidence and the scientific conclusion whether or not it passes your own personal threshold of belief.
However when science is successfully put into practice then it becomes somewhat harder to reject. Any subsequent denial would imo be more of reality than science.
If science is shown to work well in practice then why not use scientific methods to make reasonable conclusions about the past, rather than presupposing that the unknown author of a particular ancient scripture somehow knew better?

Yes I agree, and when it is most of the time it is properly dealt with. Sadly, NOT in this area we are discussing. Mostly those who support the science don't actually know it but unlike Christians, they accept it as fact just because they are told it is fact. As a Christian, I establish what FACT is based on the Bible. If the Bible contradicts issue such as evolution and the Big Bang (or whatever it is being called these days) then I have no problem rejecting that so-called science.
Methodology is important for sure, as long as the methodology is sound. Sadly it isn't always so.

Isaiah 11:12

Did you have a point in quoting this verse?

 

[Kdall]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg



First of all, faith is NOT blind, and I DO.
The Bible is how God effectively and arbitrarily communicates His will to believers. That way no ONE person can say "God told me", which still sadly happens.



Jesus said "IT IS WRITTEN" a total of 31 times in the Gospels, and it is used another 47 times in the rest of the NT, so yes it is established and important to see what God's Word has to say about ANYTHING!



Yes I agree, and when it is most of the time it is properly dealt with. Sadly, NOT in this area we are discussing. Mostly those who support the science don't actually know it but unlike Christians, they accept it as fact just because they are told it is fact. As a Christian, I establish what FACT is based on the Bible. If the Bible contradicts issue such as evolution and the Big Bang (or whatever it is being called these days) then I have no problem rejecting that so-called science.
Methodology is important for sure, as long as the methodology is sound. Sadly it isn't always so.



Did you have a point in quoting this verse?

Notice that he skirted around the Bible's reliability vs the Quran's question again

 

[MichaelCadry]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg

First of all, faith is NOT blind, and I DO.
The Bible is how God effectively and arbitrarily communicates His will to believers. That way no ONE person can say "God told me", which still sadly happens.

Jesus said "IT IS WRITTEN" a total of 31 times in the Gospels, and it is used another 47 times in the rest of the NT, so yes it is established and important to see what God's Word has to say about ANYTHING!

Yes I agree, and when it is most of the time it is properly dealt with. Sadly, NOT in this area we are discussing. Mostly those who support the science don't actually know it but unlike Christians, they accept it as fact just because they are told it is fact. As a Christian, I establish what FACT is based on the Bible. If the Bible contradicts issue such as evolution and the Big Bang (or whatever it is being called these days) then I have no problem rejecting that so-called science.
Methodology is important for sure, as long as the methodology is sound. Sadly it isn't always so.

Did you have a point in quoting this verse?

Dear StanJ,

I know you are replying to alwight, but I did think I would mention that I also believe that the Bible contradicts evolution.

I would answer more, but the questions are directed to you.

God Be With You As You Answer!!

Michael

:readthis: :idea:

 

[StanJ]

Dear StanJ,

I know you are replying to alwight, but I did think I would mention that I also believe that the Bible contradicts evolution.

I would answer more, but the questions are directed to you.

God Be With You As You Answer!!

Michael

:readthis: :idea:

Hey it's a public forum Bud...pile on. :thumb:

 

[Jose Fly]

As a Christian, I establish what FACT is based on the Bible. If the Bible contradicts issue such as evolution and the Big Bang (or whatever it is being called these days) then I have no problem rejecting that so-called science.

So as long as the conclusion agrees with your beliefs, it's ok. But if the conclusion disagrees with your beliefs, it's automatically wrong.

Methodology is important for sure, as long as the methodology is sound. Sadly it isn't always so.

You don't even recognize the contradiction there, do you? What you just described above is where the conclusion is what matters, not the method you used to arrive at it.

If the method was what is most important to you, then you would accept any conclusion that came from the proper method, whether it agreed with your beliefs or not. But you don't. You just said that you will only accept conclusions that agree with your beliefs.

Didn't think that through, did you? :chuckle:

 

[everready]

Jose' said: "So as long as the conclusion agrees with your beliefs, it's ok. But if the conclusion disagrees with your beliefs, it's automatically wrong."

If the conclusion disagrees with Gods word is what you should have said because if it doesn't agree with Gods word its automatically wrong.

everready

 

[alwight]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg

I watched it yet again, couldn't resist.

First of all, faith is NOT blind, and I DO.
The Bible is how God effectively and arbitrarily communicates His will to believers. That way no ONE person can say "God told me", which still sadly happens.

Then the Bible seems to me more like a fig leave for an otherwise blind faith perhaps? Why wouldn't other scriptures be just as likely to do be doing the same job?

Jesus said "IT IS WRITTEN" a total of 31 times in the Gospels, and it is used another 47 times in the rest of the NT, so yes it is established and important to see what God's Word has to say about ANYTHING!

What is written about Jesus is in itself something that is written anonymously and un-verifiably.

Yes I agree, and when it is most of the time it is properly dealt with. Sadly, NOT in this area we are discussing. Mostly those who support the science don't actually know it but unlike Christians, they accept it as fact just because they are told it is fact. As a Christian, I establish what FACT is based on the Bible. If the Bible contradicts issue such as evolution and the Big Bang (or whatever it is being called these days) then I have no problem rejecting that so-called science.
Methodology is important for sure, as long as the methodology is sound. Sadly it isn't always so.

Firstly I see no reason to suppose that science is corrupt nor an atheistic conspiracy so I conclude that in the majority of cases scientific conclusions are arrived at honestly by scientists who do know what they are talking about, even when I personally don't.
Science is not a mishmash of various opinions it aims to closely match the truth or be shown that it is false.
Apart from that, scientific conclusions and evidence can often be readily understood by non-scientists even if the details can't always be.
Which is why I trust that those who do understand more than I do are being honest and have no other conspiratorial agenda in mind to misinform.
Have you any reason to suppose that the anonymous authors of any ancient scripture warrant any such trust?

Did you have a point in quoting this verse?

Because you asked me where in the OT it claimed that the Earth had four corners. :liberals:

 

[MichaelCadry]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg

First of all, faith is NOT blind, and I DO.
The Bible is how God effectively and arbitrarily communicates His will to believers. That way no ONE person can say "God told me", which still sadly happens.

"God told me" did happen to me a couple times, Stan. It happens sometimes. I know it is completely rare.

Jesus said "IT IS WRITTEN" a total of 31 times in the Gospels, and it is used another 47 times in the rest of the NT, so yes it is established and important to see what God's Word has to say about ANYTHING!

Definitely true!

Yes I agree, and when it is most of the time it is properly dealt with. Sadly, NOT in this area we are discussing. Mostly those who support the science don't actually know it but unlike Christians, they accept it as fact just because they are told it is fact. As a Christian, I establish what FACT is based on the Bible. If the Bible contradicts issue such as evolution and the Big Bang (or whatever it is being called these days) then I have no problem rejecting that so-called science.
Methodology is important for sure, as long as the methodology is sound. Sadly it isn't always so.

I agree wholeheartedly, except maybe the Big Bang. Have to hear more on it first.

Did you have a point in quoting this verse?

 

[StanJ]

"God told me" did happen to me a couple times, Stan. It happens sometimes.

I agree Michael, but in the context I was posting about, it is in concert with God's written word, not in spite or contradiction to it.

I have myself hear God plainly speak to me on more than a few occasions.
Only those who have that PERSONAL relationship with Him can ever know and experience that.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Alwight, StanJ put me on ignore for asking "How do you know that the Bible is more reliable than the Quran?" Do you think you could pose that question to him again? He never gave me an answer

Dear Kdall,

The Bible includes Jesus as our Messiah, Mary's virgin birth, Jesus as the Son of God, etc., compared to the Qur'an. Plus they are wrong saying the jinn (devils) are made of fire. The devils are supposed to burn in fire forever, so I don't think they are made of fire!

Michael

 

[StanJ]

I watched it yet again, couldn't resist.

It's an oldie but a goodie.

Then the Bible seems to me more like a fig leave for an otherwise blind faith perhaps? Why wouldn't other scriptures be just as likely to do be doing the same job?

Appearances can ALWAYS be deceiving alwight. If you are NOT a spiritual person, you cannot understand the spiritual things. John 4:24 (NIV)

What is written about Jesus is in itself something that is written anonymously and un-verifiably.

Not at all, and some has been fully verified. You may want to give the following link a read? https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=105&article=91

Firstly I see no reason to suppose that science is corrupt nor an atheistic conspiracy so I conclude that in the majority of cases scientific conclusions are arrived at honestly by scientists who do know what they are talking about, even when I personally don't.
Science is not a mishmash of various opinions it aims to closely match the truth or be shown that it is false.
Apart from that, scientific conclusions and evidence can often be readily understood by non-scientists even if the details can't always be.
Which is why I trust that those who do understand more than I do are being honest and have no other conspiratorial agenda in mind to misinform.
Have you any reason to suppose that the anonymous authors of any ancient scripture warrant any such trust?

What you state here for the most part is probably very accurate, but in this issue a lot of what is espoused AS science is indeed not factual or even proven. I don't lack confidence in science, just so-called science.

Because you asked me where in the OT it claimed that the Earth had four corners.

Sorry can't remember that I did, but the old testament is really speaking of the four winds but here's a couple of links for you.

http://www.candicedoestheworld.com/2012/09/i-went-to-one-of-the-four-corners-of-the-world/

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c017.html

You can also check out the hyperbole in Is 40:22 (NIV) where is does indicate the earth is a sphere.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear StanJ,

I don't feel well right now. I will get on again later and answer these posts.

Thanks!!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

So as long as the conclusion agrees with your beliefs, it's ok. But if the conclusion disagrees with your beliefs, it's automatically wrong.

You don't even recognize the contradiction there, do you? What you just described above is where the conclusion is what matters, not the method you used to arrive at it.

If the method was what is most important to you, then you would accept any conclusion that came from the proper method, whether it agreed with your beliefs or not. But you don't. You just said that you will only accept conclusions that agree with your beliefs.

Didn't think that through, did you? :chuckle:

Dear Jose,

I think what is being said here is that evolution doesn't make it over the Creation account. It's that simple. Now, I don't know quite enough about the Big Bang theory to properly address it. I don't think anyone can say with surety. God knows what happened and I'm just fine with waiting for Him to tell me when I'm with Him. It won't be long now!!!

Michael

:idea: :sam:

 

[Kdall]

Jose' said: "So as long as the conclusion agrees with your beliefs, it's ok. But if the conclusion disagrees with your beliefs, it's automatically wrong."

If the conclusion disagrees with Gods word is what you should have said because if it doesn't agree with Gods word its automatically wrong.

everready

This is why creationists can't have nice things

 

[Kdall]

I don't lack confidence in science, just so-called science.

When you only accept science that fits in with your preconceived notions of the world based on a 2000-4000 year old collection of religious texts written by people who were not involved in science, you absolutely do lack confidence in science. And to a degree that is utterly astounding based on the fact that it is so much more readily verified than what you DO easily accept to be factual

 

[MichaelCadry]

Jose' said: "So as long as the conclusion agrees with your beliefs, it's ok. But if the conclusion disagrees with your beliefs, it's automatically wrong."

If the conclusion disagrees with Gods word is what you should have said because if it doesn't agree with Gods word its automatically wrong.

everready

Dear everready,

You really are everready!! Thanks for clearing that mess up. I'm going to give you and StanJ some more pos. rep pts., if it will let me this soon.

God's Best For You And Your Loved Ones!!

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

I watched it yet again, couldn't resist.

Yes, it is impeccable!! Quite funny!!

Then the Bible seems to me more like a fig leave for an otherwise blind faith perhaps? Why wouldn't other scriptures be just as likely to do be doing the same job?

The Bible has a cover and doesn't need a fig leaf instead of leather. The faith, Alwight, is not BLIND! To you, it probably is. But to us in the know, it is definitely REAL!! It's so nice to believe in something that Our Father in Heaven is pleased with and be a part of something humungous and glorious, and Fantastic, and Awesome!! Yippee!! The other scriptures do do the same job.

What is written about Jesus is in itself something that is written anonymously and un-verifiably.

What is written about Jesus was not written anonymously. You just wish it was, don't you? We had Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul for starters. How about your scientific literature. Is it all verifiable? Some of the older stuff, I don't think so. And some of the new stuff, I don't think so, like that stuff about light finally coming from a star after 3.1 billion years or whatever. So much besides that. I've seen science journals that are not verifiable and also BORING to boot. I do like Chemistry though. I had my own Chemistry set when I was a teenager.

Firstly I see no reason to suppose that science is corrupt nor an atheistic conspiracy so I conclude that in the majority of cases scientific conclusions are arrived at honestly by scientists who do know what they are talking about, even when I personally don't.

Yes, science has been corrupt and you're saying it's not. Do you remember Carbon-14 dating, Lucy, Piltdown Man, and that whale-like creature called a Rhodoceterus, or however you spell it. And I surely don't believe in the way science DATES things. That is a big laugh.

Science is not a mishmash of various opinions it aims to closely match the truth or be shown that it is false.

Apart from that, scientific conclusions and evidence can often be readily understood by non-scientists even if the details can't always be.

We want all of the details, beforehand and then your deductions.

Which is why I trust that those who do understand more than I do are being honest and have no other conspiratorial agenda in mind to misinform.

I addressed your honesty and conspiracy already.

Have you any reason to suppose that the anonymous authors of any ancient scripture warrant any such trust?

Most, if not ALL, books of the Bible have ascribed authors and they are not anonymous. Don't you have a Bible. It tells you at the beginning of each book who wrote it. I trust them. I've been spoken to by God and angels. Of course I believe what I do. Have you? No, because He's not going to let you hear an angel because then you would turn to Him not by faith, and He wants those who believe and LOVE Him, not someone who all of a sudden knows God exists, and so then they be good so they don't go to a very uncomfortable, long vacation.

Because you asked me where in the OT it claimed that the Earth had four corners. :liberals:

Thank you so much, alwight!! When the four corners was used, it was used to mean north, south, east and west.

Michael

 

[MichaelCadry]

I agree Michael, but in the context I was posting about, it is in concert with God's written word, not in spite or contradiction to it.

I have myself hear God plainly speak to me on more than a few occasions.
Only those who have that PERSONAL relationship with Him can ever know and experience that.

Dear StanJ,

Thanks for understanding!! I know it is hard to do. I've just had a charmed life to say the least. It's one in over a million. I don't know what else to tell you. I just speak what I've seen and heard. It is my testimony which God will bear witness of, not me. Just give it another 1/2 of year. Yippee!!! I've been waiting for this for a LONGGG TIME!!!

Much Love, In Jesus Christ,

Michael

:sam: :idea:

 

[MichaelCadry]

I agree Michael, but in the context I was posting about, it is in concert with God's written word, not in spite or contradiction to it.

I have myself hear God plainly speak to me on more than a few occasions.
Only those who have that PERSONAL relationship with Him can ever know and experience that.

Dear StanJ,

I know. Isn't is wonderful?!! We are part of an ENORMOUS Thing going on and we're both going down that narrow road, and we're making it because of our Strong LOVE in God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost!!

Selah!!

Michael

:readthis:

 

[MichaelCadry]

When you only accept science that fits in with your preconceived notions of the world based on a 2000-4000 year old collection of religious texts written by people who were not involved in science, you absolutely do lack confidence in science. And to a degree that is utterly astounding based on the fact that it is so much more readily verified than what you DO easily accept to be factual

Dear Kdall,

We accept from an account that Moses started writing about after the book of Genesis. I'm sure God told Him every word to write, because He does that with me also. I slip up sometimes, but I do my best. It's a spiritual bond is all I can tell you. As I write, the words come into my left ear according to what I should write. That's always how the Lord has done it.

I don't want to mess with going to radiation because it could have spread to another part of my body and then I will have to pay another $6,000 for that 8 weeks of radiation. So you can see why my hesitance.

Much Love, In Christ, Buddy!!

Michael

:sam: :banana: