BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Mr Happy
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 01:03 PM

Pete,

I'm mystified, what is 'Seven Stars' - is it a pub?

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Paul Burke
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 01:26 PM

why would you want to believe God created you if there is a possibility that you are answerable to him.

I think what our somewhat hard-of-thinking friend is getting at is Pascal's wager. If you believe in God and there is a God you go to heaven; if there isn't you don't notice. Conversely, the unbeliever if right will not notice, whereas if wrong will face eternity in hell. Which works (for cowards) if there is only one possibility of the identity of God.

But if you spend your life pleasing the wrong god you are no better off than the atheist. So you spend your time in fear of Jesus or Ahura Mazda, and it turns out Allah was the boy all along. Or one of ten thousand others.

All in all, if you only have one life, and you waste it living in fear of a bogeyman, that's it, it's gone.

So an agnostic might reason that he's as well off living without the specific prescriptions of any one presumed deity, and hope that if a god actually exists he/ she/ it will be amenable to reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 02:17 PM

Paul Burke is exactly right. Pascal's wager only allows 4 possible situations.

Even IF there is a god, he may not be as all the different religions 'define' him...(if fact, how could he?) ...why, as the above mentioned Walter Kaufmann notes, he may reserve a special spot in Hell for those who go to mass!

Almost ALL religious positions make unwarranted assumptions about the basic truths, then adapt everything else to fit.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 02:50 PM

pete, I've read your answer several times and I still don't really understand it (thanks to Paul Burke and Bill D for pointing out that it might have something to do with Pascal's Wager).

What I was getting at is, do you believe that humans are superior to the rest of Nature (note how I avoided the word 'Creation'!)? And do you, and your fellow creationists, believe that God has given us humans the right to destroy the other living things that we share this planet with? If your answer is "yes" - that's one of the main reasons why I am opposed to religion(s); if your answer is "no" what has your religion done to oppose the appalling destruction of biodiversity that is going on all around us?

And by the way, I am not an atheist, I am an agnostic. As I've written many, many times it's not possible to prove that God does not exist because, logically, no-one can prove a negative. Therefore it is the RESPONSIBILITY of 'theists' to prove that God exists. If you believe in God so fervently, pete, I challenge you to prove that He exists! If you can do that I promise not to be mean to you again!

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 04:28 PM

"I challenge you to prove that He exists! If you can do that I promise not to be mean to you again!"

If I accept that challenge, will you promise not to be mean to me again? If so, I'll need a day or two to consider the proof.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Penny S.
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 05:09 PM

The Seven Stars is a pub just off the A20, just inside Greater London, where folk sing on a Monday. Including Pete.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 05:37 PM

Does that mean Pete only types all that while at a pub? Mercy...

Before, during, or instead of singing & drinking?

I used to sing in a pub on Mondays... but never thought much about evolution while I was there... ☺

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Penny S.
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 05:41 PM

I think that what bolsters unbelief are a number of things which people outside belief systems see as - how shall I put this - at least difficult, but grading to intolerable, about those systems. Nothing at all to do with a belief in evolution.

As an example, when King John, known to be an atheist, had a dispute with the Pope over the appointment of the archbish of Canterbury, th ePope put England under interdict. This did not bother John at all. Oddly, it did not bother the population much, either, despite being denied the sacraments, holy matrimony, proper funerals, absolution of sins and so on. (For someone not a good man, it's quite interesting that the common people came out to support him when the barons brought the French prince over to replace him.) We don't know, though, why John was an atheist. But it wasn't because of evolution.

A lot of people never have a direct experience which they can describe as being communication with God. That makes belief difficult. Personal contact is really the only way there can be belief.

A lot of people have direct experiences of people claiming to be in communication with god whose behaviour is not consistent with a god anyone would want to worship. A lot of people are taught about a god whose behaviour is not consistent with someone anyone would want to have as a friend. They don't want to be told that when they are in heaven they will not be troubled about those of their family who rejected god and are in hell for ever. They want to be troubled about that. They don't much like the idea of a god who sets up what Rabbi Blue called a concentration camp, or allows it to be set up, and they find a lot of the arguments in favour of it slithery and unconvincing, if not downright nasty.

There is a church by the South Circular (have I ever mentioned this) which has a regular large notice preaching to those stuck in the bottleneck traffic jam. Once, a long time back, it was split in two halves. One said "God Loves You". The other added "And if you don't love Him, you will go to Hell." This is not how to win friends and influence people. They've been much better since. Though the current one, using the Olympics logo, states "God has YOU on his calendar", which I'm sure they think is welcoming, but somehow has a touch of threat about it.

It isn't evolution that drives people from belief. It's belief itself. Especially when it expects people to disconnect their brains. (The Dean of King's College in London has a notice about this - Jesus did not come to get you to stop thinking - but I can't remember it accurately). Jesus said that we should love God with all our heart and our soul, and our mind, and our strength. Suggesting that not using our mind is a necessary part of belief goes against that. (And while I was seeing if the Dean's notice could be found on the net, I found a few sites that suggested people should do just that. Turn off your mind to be open to the Spirit.)

People should be showing that God is Love in their lives, not presenting him like some sort of mafia boss who gets the sulks if dissed. That's what drives people away. Not science.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 05:59 PM

"I found a few sites that suggested people should do just that. Turn off your mind to be open to the Spirit.)"

and I have been told, right here on Mudcat, to do essentially that-- in relation to God, Spirit, telepathy...etc.
"Accept in order to believe"... I just cannot wrap MY head around the idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 06:05 PM

Wow!

Penny definitely knows where her towel is!

(See The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Penny S.
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 06:08 PM

You are going to make my hats unfit for purpose.

Thanks, anyway. I got some nasty stuff aimed at me at a religious site the other week (generally a place not given to extremism) when I got up the nose of some people I had thought were older than the playground, so it's nice to be appreciated.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 06:19 PM

OK, 999, it's a deal! Get working on that proof!

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,999
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 06:35 PM

Yer on (or I am) Shimrod.

##########################

Penny: "It isn't evolution that drives people from belief. It's belief itself."

I disagree mildly because it's not belief itself that does that but rather being told what that belief is or should be. That's what turned and still turns me off.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 06:56 PM

bill-no i dont type at the singaround but i do have a couple of songs about evolutionism.
the name is from that pub ;seemed imaginative at the time!

shimrod-it was no-ones wager i was thinking of.time has been short and i may not have been clear enough.
the dominion mandate in genesis is not one of destruction but stewardship.adam was put in the garden to tend it after his creation.
however i believe man is above nature and is to use its resources responsibly.
i cannot prove Gods existence and i dont think it is the christians responsibility to do so but to testify as to why we believe, though this may well involve offering evidences and arguments which no doubt you've heard before.so go back to being uncivil if you wish-and i go back to not responding!.

penny-too many points in your post to respond to but just a couple of comments.
certainly there are many things which hinder faith but IMO evolutionism is the worst because it is more subtle.it attempts to explain creation without a need of a creator.
but that is not to negate some of the other reasons.
i have to confess the thought of anyone in hell is painful,let alone loved ones,but i cannot be certain they passed away unbelieving ,and if they did the story of dives and lazarus teaches us that they dont want their loved ones following them there.
but perhaps that another part of the bible you dont accept?
best wishes-pete.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Feb 12 - 07:37 PM

""bill-no i dont type at the singaround but i do have a couple of songs about evolutionism.
the name is from that pub ;seemed imaginative at the time!""

In truth Pete you have, or at least you sing, no other songs than those which are anti evolution or pro Creationism.

You really need to broaden your horizons, religious and musical.

Too much monkey business is a classic example of misunderstanding what Darwin was saying about natural selection, and you have nothing but your belief/opinion to rebut his work.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Iona
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 12:47 AM

"Do you believe that it is possible to question, doubt, or disbelieve some of the contents of the Bible and still be a Christian?"
It's not that I don't have an answer to this question, Don. The Bible does. But I don't think that it's relevant to the discussion, and I don't have the time to deviate from all the dozens of other arguments that I have yet to answer. Your 'important question' is important, yes, but not vital to the discussion at hand. If you really want me to answer it, you can find my email address in this thread on one of the last posts.

Iona

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 01:50 AM

Iona, it is the very core of the matter.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Paul Burke
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 02:06 AM

Do you believe that it is possible to question, doubt, or disbelieve some of the contents of the Bible and still be a Christian?"
It's not that I don't have an answer to this question, Don. The Bible does.

Round and round. If the Bible isn't 100% literally true, whatever answer the Bible gives has to be examined to decide whether it is to be taken literally or metaphorically. At school, they taught us that some saint's prayer was highly sophisticated: "Oh my God, I believe in Thee and all thy Church doth teach, because Thou hast said it, and Thy Word is true" (their capitalisation). Even as ten-year-olds, we could see the flaw in that.

in any case, even if the Bible were 100% true, all Christians accept that parts of it (at the very least the bits about sacrificing lambs) were superseded in the New Testament. But since there's no list of which bits were repealed and which still hold, you still don't know when you read a statement if it is the working rule or not.

Which of course is where Protestantism came in. The Pope and his butties claimed a monopoly in interpretation, and justified it with biblical references. Now we have the descendants of those who fought and fried and died for their right to their own interpretation, claiming that they (or their local pope/imam) own God.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Iona
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 02:19 AM

I disagree, Don. I don't think that the issue of assurance is going to determine whether the Lord created the earth in six days -as He says He did- or not.

Email me anytime, though. I don't propose to have answers to everything--but the Bible does.

Iona

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 04:35 AM

"the dominion mandate in genesis is not one of destruction but stewardship.adam was put in the garden to tend it after his creation.
however i believe man is above nature and is to use its resources responsibly."

Aha! Thought so! Well, pete, Christianity has evidently failed on the 'stewardship' front, hasn't it? As far as I can see Christian missionaries were in the vanguard when Western, Christian 'civilisation' went out to conquer, rape, despoil and enslave the rest of the world.

"i cannot prove Gods existence and i dont think it is the christians responsibility to do so but to testify as to why we believe, though this may well involve offering evidences and arguments which no doubt you've heard before.so go back to being uncivil if you wish-and i go back to not responding!"

No, of course you can't prove the existence of God! But if you want me, or anyone else, to believe in Him I insist that it IS your responsibility to prove His existence. I must also remind you that respect has to be earned. Having said that, I don't usually begin a relationship by dis-respecting someone - but if they continue to spout dangerous tosh my respect for them certainly doesn't increase!
I also strongly believe that, in this day and age, the religious and the pious are not automatically entitled to respect - as they may have been in the past.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Musket
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 04:49 AM

If the bible has an answer to everything, where does it tell me next week's lottery numbers?

it doesn't.

Thought so.

Not much use to me then, is it?

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Penny S.
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:38 AM

Pete, I'm glad you aren't one of those who sees one of the joys of heaven being watching the sinners in hell (medieval idea, that one), or one of those who thinks that those in heaven forget the lost - but I didn't think you would be.

That parable is interesting. OK, Abraham tells Dives that he can't do anything for his brothers, but, as you say, Dives is deeply concerned for them - someone damned is shown as having more concern for others than later people thought the saved can have. A bit ironic. I wonder what we are supposed to come away from that with. There's more there than a warning about changing our lives in this life, maybe. It is, of course, a parable, a story intended to make us think about things, and usually people do not think that those stories are factual.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 12:12 PM

Yesterday (23.02.2012) Professor Richard Dawkins and Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, held a televised debate on Evolution. I didn't actually see the debate on TV, but I read about it in today's 'Independent' newspaper (UK). Apparently Dr Williams " ... even confessed his belief in evolution, and agreed with Dawkins that humans shared non-human ancestors."

"Rather than arguing, Dawkins and Williams seemed intent on finding areas of agreement. Did the Archbishop agree that there was probably no "first man", that human evolution was gradual, and that - in Dawkins' formulation - no pair of Homo erectus parents gazed down proudly at their Homo sapiens new-born? He [the Arcbishop] did."

"Could Dawkins disprove the existence of God? He could not, he confessed, describing himself as an agnostic [rather than an atheist] ... On his own atheism scale of one-to-seven, the Professor suggested, "the probability of any supernatural creator existing is very, very low, so let's say I'm a 6.9"." Spot on - in my opinion!

So, there you go, Iona and pete, even a head honcho of the God-squadders believes in evolution!

Oh, sorry! He doesn't belong to your particular fundamentalist micro-sect(s) - does he?

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Paul Burke
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 01:08 PM

as He says He did-

No he doesn't. Not even the most rabid fundie thinks god wrote the bible. The more gullible think Moses wrote bits of it. The exception might be perhaps our dear interlocutor, who seems to have no critical faculties whatsoever, and will swallow any tale, provided it's the one they want to hear.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 02:23 PM

"I don't think that the issue of assurance is going to determine whether the Lord created the earth in six days -as He says He did- or not."

No, Iona, the Lord did NOT say that. The very mortal, fallible person or persons who wrote the book of Genesis said that.

Let me ask you this. Do you believe that Adam and Eve are actual historical persons?

A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice. It will tell me whether or not there is any point in pursuing this conversation any further.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 02:26 PM

They may well believe that other people wrote it under Divine Guidance. Which raises some interesting free will questions ...

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Stringsinger
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 03:01 PM



Not true. The very definition of an atheist denies the validity of Christianity as a worldview.

< For instance, you all abide by traffic signs (at least some of you do). You stop at red lights, etc. Why? Why would you let those people who put up that light impose their worldview on you?>

This is not an imposition of a world view but a practical agreement that people were able to do before Christia-insanity came into the world.

< After all, the stoplight imposes that human life is of value (Thou shalt not kill), and that we ought not to damage other people's property (thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself).>

These ideas predate Christia-insanity. Most of the tenets of the bible were borrowed from other cultures and religious ideas much earlier.

< If you reject the Bible, you must reject all the worldview that you hold because of Biblical ethics. If we are all just aquatic sludge, humans are no different than earthworms.>

This doesn't follow. Biblical ethics are a recent phenomenon and have been grossly distorted and if you read the bible, you can see how this is true. The King James image of god in the old testament is a tyrant and a mass murderer.

At no point in Origin of Species did Darwln ever state that humans were aquatic sludge.
This is a misconception used as propaganda by fundamentalist Christians.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,pete from seven stars link
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 04:02 PM

don T -That is a very sweeping statement.true i have 4 songs i sing regularly [but not all at every session ]that deal with the subject plus a xmas song and a harvest song sang seasonally.most of my songs relate to my faith which is the core of who i am.my songwriting flows out of that;why should that bother you?.i'm not insisting on you believing.but to your credit you listen[or switch off maybe]respectfully so thanks for that.
as to monkey biz;if you care to be more specific i am happy to discuss any possible inaccuracies in my song.
pete.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Paul Burke
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 04:24 PM

i have to confess the thought of anyone in hell is painful,let alone loved ones,but i cannot be certain they passed away unbelieving ,and if they did the story of dives and lazarus teaches us that they dont want their loved ones following them there.

I do know that the writer of this is very intellectually challenged, but even children revolt at the thought of their "loved ones" burning for all eternity. They even get upset about goldfish not going to heaven. God, the morass of this benighted mind! He has obviously never heard of the term "wrestling with God", or is such a wimp that he'd swallow muck sooner than use his brain.

As for Dives and Lazarus:

There was a rich man and he lived in Jerusalem
Glory Hallebalooya, hi rogerum
He wore a top hat and his coat was very sprucium,
Glory Hallebalooya, hi rogerum
Hi rogerum, hey hi rogerum
Skiddly dinky doorium,
Skiddley dinky doorium
Glory Hallebalooya, hi rogerum

Does that get us Above The Line?

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Iona
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 04:40 PM

Don:

Yes. Adam and Eve were flesh-and-blood people, like you and I. So were all the historical people in the Bible, which was written (put pen to paper) by men, but written by God because He gave them the words to write. "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

Another thing I want to address is that you all are always bringing up the bad things that professing Christians have done, and then using it as a proof against Christianity. In logic that's called Ad Hominem, and it's a fallacy. Just because sinful men who call themselves Christians (who may not even be regenerate) do bad things, does not discredit the truth of the Scriptures.It just goes to prove that God is very merciful that He will save even the worst of men, if they repent. The Bible is historically, mathematically and scientifically accurate and has withstood the test of time and come out on top of all criticism, as even Times Magazine said: "After more than two centuris of facing the heaviest scientific guns that could be brought to bear, the Bible has survived, and is perhaps the better for the siege. Even on the critic's own terms -historical fact- Scriptures seem more acceptable now than i t did when the rationalists began the attack." (Time Magazine "How True Is the Bible?")

If the bible has an answer to everything, where does it tell me next week's lottery numbers?
The Bibile does not have specific references to everything. But it has principles, in it which apply to every area of life. In the case of gambling, we can apply 1 Timothy 6:10, Hebrews 13:5, Proverbs 13:11, Proverbs 23:5 and Ecclesiastes 5:10. Also we can apply the commandment that 'Thou shalt not steal" in the context that gambling takes money from one person and gives to another. Ther are many other scriptures that we could also apply to gambling.

Again, the Bible is perfect, the Word of God. The 66 books and those 66 books alone are the infallible Scriptures, because those are the books that God inspired.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: beardedbruce
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 04:42 PM

Matthew 24;23 tells me not to believe you.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Iona
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 05:16 PM

Acts 17:11 tells you to test everything in the light of the Scriptures.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,999
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 05:18 PM

"Yes. Adam and Eve were flesh-and-blood people, like you and I. So were all the historical people in the Bible, which was written (put pen to paper) by men, but written by God because He gave them the words to write."

The Book of Mormon was written under the same circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Greg F.
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 05:19 PM

Dear Lord, protect me from your followers and their rabbitting on...
perhaps we need the Ezekiel 3:26 treatment here......

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:03 PM

. . . pass the peanut butter. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:11 PM

"I don't propose to have answers to everything--but the Bible does."

And *I* must read those answers and 'decide' whether to believe them.

I put it to you this way: If God exists AND is all-powerful and controls how everything is, then HE gave me (us) brains which are able to question & doubt. *IF* he allows us to use our brains to question and debate all this, then it is a very unfair &, I might add, un-Godly thing to demand we believe that those words "which was written (put pen to paper) by men", are in fact, inspired by Him.
Why bother to make the eternal souls of we poor, fallible mortals dependent on accepting 2000 years of selecting, editing, translating, and interpreting words "written by other men"?

No matter how I got this brain, it has the ability to analyze and judge claims & assertions about its own essence and creation. As we prove here, it is not only possible, but common, to see the problems with the status of the claimed evidence for theology!!

If I were a (god) and NEEDED to be believed in & worshiped, I would most assuredly remind those poor, fallible, doubting mortals on a regular basis instead of ONE basic warning when we were just learning to write.~~~~~ Perhaps clouds parting and fiery letters in the sky saying "Hey! Pay attention! You all have been ignoring scripture again! Note what I said in Proverbs 13:3!"

And... when some especially egregious sin was committed, one of those lightning bolts would ZAP the offender before he was able to, for example, do harm to masses of "true believers".

You see, Iona... to we who assume that brains with the power of REASON would be used for reason, and not as rubber-stamps for interesting, but undocumented, stories told to us by other fallible men.....(and women.)



"Acts 17:11 tells you to test everything in the light of the Scriptures."

Ummm... so, when I said a few hundred posts ago, that that very admonition involves invalid, circular reasoning, it is especially relevant here. You can, of course, use YOUR brain to ignore and reject the logical flaws in your own reason...THAT is part of what "free will" means!

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:13 PM

( I really like Proverbs 13:3)

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:30 PM

Proverbs 13:3.

I believe it was Mark Twain who said pretty much the same thing: "It is better to keep silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt."

####

If we are going to be literal about this, then we are required to be consistent.

The Bible says that God formed Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed life into him. Then He made Eve from one of Adam's ribs—

Well, this raises a couple of questions. How come men have the same number of ribs on each side?

And how come they both have belly buttons???

Enquiring minds want to know.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:51 PM

""Also we can apply the commandment that 'Thou shalt not steal" in the context that gambling takes money from one person and gives to another. Ther are many other scriptures that we could also apply to gambling.""

That is arrant nonsense, since it cannot be called theft when the loser is willingly, even enthusiastically, complicit in the loss.

You believe that the bible is the word of God because the bible says so, thereby proving to your satisfaction the existence of God, and round and round.......

"Shallow oh shallow brain"

When you have finished with this discussion I have this amazing elixir for sale........call me.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:53 PM

They weren't supposed to eat apples, so they ate navel oranges... ☺
(and Mark Twain's aphorism is a pretty watered down version of Proverbs 13:3   *grin*)

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: DMcG
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 06:57 PM

which was written (put pen to paper) by men, but written by God because He gave them the words to write

Ok. Let's assume consider that a little. The words were written (in many cases) in an ancient form of Hebrew, which is distinct from modern Hebrew. The only way anyone now knows what it says, is because that's what their teachers said the words meant, and so on through teacher after teacher.   You can only learn ancient Hebrew in that fashion, based on what your tutors understand by those words. Then because of transcription errors and damage - why did God allow that to happen to his words? - you get the 'lion' effect, which I'm sure you remember that one from a few hundred posts ago? So even where the words were accurately written down, our ability to understand it is severely impaired, and where the text isn't accurate or is damaged there is much guesswork. Yes, there are specialist scholars. No, they can't achieve perfection.

If you doubt that - and I am sure you do! - you can see the same effect if you try to read some English from let's say 10th century: it isn't easy and there's a heck of a lot of guesswork for all kinds of reasons, including changes in the meanings of words.

ANY text, including this one, has to be interpreted by the reader: the idea that the meaning of any writer is perfectly captured by a series of sqiggles without the reader bringing their own interpretation as part of the transmission of the underlying idea is simplistic in the extreme.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 07:06 PM

Pete, I have absolutely no problem with your beliefs, whether you belief in God, Allah, Jehovah, or the Cosmic Pixie being a matter of supreme indifference to me.

However, the place for religious music is surely in whatever house of worship you frequent, and you should expect that there will be disquiet about your relentless and constant insistence upon disseminating your particular obsession in every folk and acoustic session you can reach.

Most of us go to these sessions to enjoy music rather than endure sermons.

Nobody, I believe, would complain if you actually performed these songs interspersed with other material of a more usual character for the venues.

Just a thought meant in the kindest way to persuade you to develop a little sensitivity to the mood of your audiences.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 07:16 PM

"However, the place for religious music is surely in whatever house of worship you frequent, .."

well, Don... I get your point but even I sing a few Pentecostal hymns...just because they are such amazing music.

And..I once had the privilege of hearing Mahalia Jackson in person. You do not have to believe everything you sing or listen to. The sentiment and expression can be moving, even if it does not affect your ultimate beliefs.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Paul Burke
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 07:17 PM

Waste of keystrokes.

This "iona" isn't a person we can talk to about ideas with; there's a comittee hanging in behind there, to prevent compromise, to supply the right answers, to make sure the atttempts to make contact don't elicit human sympathy.

It never responds to the killing objections, only to the ones it thinks it can answer.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 08:53 PM

You may be right, Paul... I'll try once more by reposting

"Just curious, Iona... are you willing to give a brief summary of how you grew up and/or became Christian and came to these viewpoints?

(Somewhere back up there I mentioned my basic history and how it changed over the years.)"

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: TheSnail
Date: 24 Feb 12 - 10:17 PM

Found recently in a different context which mentioned Frank Luntz, a consultant to the Republican party.

Luntz's technique was pioneered by the tobacco companies and the creationists: teach the controversy. In other words, insist that the question of whether cigarettes cause lung cancer, natural selection drives evolution, or burning fossil fuels causes climate change, is still wide open, and that both sides of the "controversy" should be taught in schools and thrashed out in the media.

As John P said it a while ago -

Iona and Pete have demonstrated that rational discussion with them is a waste of time. But they have actually won the debate, if you take being taken seriously as a victory. Attempts to engage them on this topic just makes them feel relevant. The first step for a lie (or for willful ignorance), always, is to be taken seriously.

You are all giving Iona and Pete exactly what they want, attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Iona
Date: 25 Feb 12 - 01:40 AM

"Just curious, Iona... are you willing to give a brief summary of how you grew up and/or became Christian and came to these viewpoints?"

I assure you, "Iona" is one person. Not a comitte. Not an 'it'. :) I don't think giving my life history would suppliment the debate at all, and that is why I haven't supplied it. God can save anyone. Iona is one of 'anyone'!

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: GUEST,Iona
Date: 25 Feb 12 - 02:22 AM

"In order to answer the question, we have to look at the pre-flood atmospheric conditions. First of all, we know that there was no rain until the flood occurred. Instead of rain, the earth had a heavy mist encircling the globe, which kept everything lush and green (which is why we always picture dinosaurs in a jungle-like, lush environment--the world was much more beautiful back then because it was fresh from creation!)."

We know nothing of the sort. There is no evidence for this. there is not even evidence in the Bible.

I'm not sure which one of those statements I made you are saying that we know nothing about. The no rain theory? The 'lush and jungle like environment'? I'm not going to stake anything on the first claim, though I know I made it sound a little definite at first. I've done a little more examining of the issue, and I am not altogether sure that the Bible says that there was not rain until the flood, but neither do we know that there was rain. I first got the idea of 'no rain' from Genesis 2:5-6, but also in the verse is the statement that there was no man to till the ground. And applying that with the fact that Genesis 2 is a detailed recap of Creation Week, it's safe to say that it was referring to the period before man was created. There may have been rain before the flood (since rain is a vital part to the water cycle). But I still hold to the well founded assertion that the historic, pre-flood earth was very lush and beautiful. We find palm trees fossilized in Antarctica. We find 'jungle' plants (Cycads) alongside dinosaurs, and like I said, that's why dinosaurs are pictured in a jungle like environment. Even by evolutionists. ;)

Iona

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: Penny S.
Date: 25 Feb 12 - 03:37 AM

Iona, it was all of those statements.

I take it you are ignoring the dating evidence for the Antarctic forests.

Here's something else to worry about - that the ancient Earth was at least once almost covered by ice.

Snowball Earth

This idea caused a lot of argument among geologists when it was put forward, but the evidence which led to the idea has resisted being discounted. I did mention the dropstones from the glaciers, I think. There are also obviously glacial sediments, which differ from those laid down by water, whether in rivers, lakes, or larger bodies of either fresh or salt water, or in still, slowly moving, or turbulent environments. The idea also led to much argument about the mechanism by which an almost totally frozen world could then melt.

Not a lush place. That was well before the dinosaurs, though. Also, the study of the environments in which dinosaur fossils are found shows a wide variety, as is found today. These variations are partly because the surface of the Earth differs because of latitude, and partly because conditions varied over the very long periods of time during which dinosaurs were the dominant fauna. If you are not happy to accept the long period evidence, look up Hadley Cells to find out how atmospheric circulation affects the environment. For example, rising air under the tropical sun causes heavy rainfall with associated forests, but when that air returns downwards, it is dry, causing the bands of deserts which lie to north and south of those forests. You wouldn't have world wide lush forest because you wouldn't have world wide rains. (This especially applies when the continents were together, as the rain would not penetrate into the continental interior.)

I thought I had posted, but can't find it, a reference to the summary of the Law which occurs both in the Torah and the Gospels "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind". Mind, mind you.

To be asked to accept the idea of a god who asks us to use our intelligence, and then constructs a world which is so easy to get wrong that the vast numbers of scientists who are trying to explain the evidence based on what the evidence shows, and trying to score points off each other by exposing errors cannot identify that it actually fits a brief account in a book recorded a long time ago, which does not go into the sort of detail they find, is not an attractive proposition.

And you cite Genesis 2 as enlarging on the acount in Genesis 1. It is in a different order, is it not?

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Young Earth Creationism Eureka!
From: DMcG
Date: 25 Feb 12 - 03:55 AM

But I still hold to the well founded assertion that the historic, pre-flood earth was very lush and beautiful. We find palm trees fossilized in Antarctica. We find 'jungle' plants (Cycads) alongside dinosaurs, and like I said, that's why dinosaurs are pictured in a jungle like environment. Even by evolutionists. ;)

If you are prepared to drop the words 'pre-flood' and replace them by 'long ago' we might have found something we can agree on! And you know why scientists picture them that way don't you? It's that little thing called testable evidence. And once again, as virtually throughout the thread, you are hopelessly confusing evolution with other things, such as geology.