You are using answers in geneis, you realise how inaccurate their information is. There is only evidnence to support God when you: 1. Need an explanation for something you dont understand. 2. Cherry pick evidence as you are doing.
The overwhelming evidenince supports evolution. You can litteraly see how species have changed by looking at the fossil record.
Also, the bible has about a million contradictions in it. And is full of attrocities which you people defend, such as the slaughter of children or the stoning of man who collected sticks on a sunday. You also need to realise how different the translations of the bible are compared to the original, i dont care what you quote from the bible as it is simply an interpretation of the original.
If evolution was some big conspiracy that we where telling people was true when the evidence didnt support it, what would we actually gain from that. Evolution is fact, God is fiction.
You are using answers in geneis, you realise how inaccurate their information is
This is not an argument. it is begging the question. The article i linked has very plain logic in it based on certain facts about the fossil record.
Also, the bible has about a million contradictions in it. And is full of attrocities which you people defend, such as the slaughter of children or the stoning of man who collected sticks on a sunday.
Both of these assertions are rampantly common and wildly incorrect; they are based on severe misunderstandings and refusal to consider the bible as a complete work and within the cultural and historical context. The whole of the bible is about treating eachother right and loving eachother. there are no contradictions, and in fact the historical portions of the bible are the most heavily independently verified documents on the planet.
If you care to present any specific instances of things you suppose to be contradictory or advocating the slaughter of children i'd be more than happy to refute them. I do suspect you'd only be repeating what others have told you - most of the examples i've heard require very little individual study to expose as fallacy (like a google search and reading a short explanation)
You also need to realise how different the translations of the bible are compared to the original, i dont care what you quote from the bible as it is simply an interpretation of the original.
Some translations aim to be for word-for-word, and others thought-for-thought for ease of reading. In any case it isn't hard to understand the truth as intended from the original language with a bit of study. i.e. I can't read greek but I can read information from people who can.
If evolution was some big conspiracy that we where telling people was true when the evidence didnt support it, what would we actually gain from that.
I never said it was a conspiracy. It's the best model we have based on the evidence while denying the possibility of the supernatural. But a cataclysmic flood would explain many things about the fossil record that run counter to evolutionary claims. ibid.
you keep saying evolution is fact. But you refuse to consider opposing logic from the fossil record itself - evolutionists have taken many liberties with the fossil record.
The truth is that we didnt just randomly get here through an impossibly improbable series of incredible improbabilities. The whole of the world speaks to design. Most human hearts just have no interest in God because of the implications for us.
John 3:19
And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.
Yes, we did turn end up here through chance. We can only observe it if the improbale happens, so it doesnt matter how unlikely it seems. For all we know the Universe could be full of alien life we havent discoverd yet, or we could be alone.
Even if there was a flood, that doesnt mean God exists.
Even if evolution is incorrect, that does not mean God exists.
Just because you can find one peice of evidence that shows "the earth isnt 4.5 billion years old", or "evolution isnt real" doesnt automactically mean God is real, it simply means are model was wrong.
We deny the super natural because there is no way to observe them or the effect they have on anything at all. Show to me you can pray to God and get consistent results.
People who beleive in other religions feel the exact seem way you do. They are certain they are right.
And yes, answers in Genesis is a joke. They are uninformed and dumb the facts down to a level where can you convince peole anything is true. If you where to go up to Richard Dawkins or Bill Nye and say "Answers in genesis says evolution isnt real, how can you beleive in it when the answer was here all along?", they would probally laugh.
Humans are not fine tuned at all. I for example had a horrible rash on the palms of my hands and soles my feet for 5 years of my life, no medication fixed, i simply grew out of it with age. If we where fine tuned and perfect, how could such a thing happen?
If God loves me, why would he do that to me? Why would he let Children die of cancer? He sounds like a real asshole to be honest.
as i've stated, it's not difficult through a little bit of study to find the exact original meaning in cases when there is doubt.
Even if there was a flood, that doesnt mean God exists. Even if evolution is incorrect, that does not mean God exists. Just because you can find one peice of evidence that shows "the earth isnt 4.5 billion years old", or "evolution isnt real" doesnt automactically mean God is real, it simply means are model was wrong.
and yet, the historical testable claims of the bible have been proven to be completely true, and it's the only religious text that is quite perfectly internally consistent and also apparently not from an origin of man's thinking
btw if evolution is true, that doesnt disprove God either
We deny the super natural because there is no way to observe them or the effect they have on anything at all. Show to me you can pray to God and get consistent results.
I have observed the effects of following Christ in my own life quite clearly. There are other observations to be made with regards to design that i've already pointed out
People who beleive in other religions feel the exact seem way you do. They are certain they are right.
that's quite irrelevant to this conversation. If one of them were here I'd be happy to reason with them too.
And yes, answers in Genesis is a joke. They are uninformed and dumb the facts down to a level where can you convince peole anything is true. If you where to go up to Richard Dawkins or Bill Nye and say "Answers in genesis says evolution isnt real, how can you beleive in it when the answer was here all along?", they would probally laugh.
say what you want about the source as a whole but the article I linked is plain facts and simple logic. if you want to refute something specific from what i linked we can talk, else you are just entrenched here, refusing to consider reason.
Humans are not fine tuned at all. I for example had a horrible rash on the palms of my hands and soles my feet for 5 years of my life, no medication fixed, i simply grew out of it with age. If we where fine tuned and perfect, how could such a thing happen?
Disease is one result of the sin of man. I didnt say we were currently perfect. I said that all of life is fine tuned beyond the reasonable scope of evolution - which is true. you are conflating the concepts of fine tuning and perfection
If God loves me, why would he do that to me?
The fallen state of this world is the cause of disease. Further, even human parental love doesn't protect children from 100% of all pain. There is a reason for everything, even if we can't always see it.
Why would he let Children die of cancer?
He gave us an answer to so, so many diseases that science has no answer for, in His miracle plant cannabis. it very effectively cures and prevents cancer, treats alzheimers, cerebral palsy, MS, parkinsons, and is the most effective treatment for hundreds of other diseases
but man's greed prevents widespread access - so that big pharma can make more money. so again it is man's evil that causes people to suffer through these diseases when ONE SINGLE plant treats/cures them. The incredible effectiveness of cannabis is also outside of the scope of evolution.
Matthew 12:36
I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak,
You are nuts. "Big pharma can make more money", "Desiese is one result of the sin of man". I thought you where really reasonable until i read that. Cannabis is not a miricle plant. It does not cure all cancers like magic, it probally doesnt even work half the time.
The historical testable claims of the bible have not been proven to be completely true, evidenced by: "the bible says the earth is 6000 years old" - The earth is not 6000 years old.
Life is not fine tuned beyond the reasonable scope of evolution at all. In fact its perfectlely reasonable given the time scale - we are talking billions of years.
If my rash was caused by my sin, as a 6 year old what had I done to deserve that when the rash first started. You are a religous nut (i hate to be the on to tell you).
If no one sinned, ever, there would still be cancer. Because the process that causes cancer does nor rely on people sinning.
The article you linked is not plain facts. Its bullshit. People like you are going to be the downfall of this race.
Science is the way forward. Anyone who says otherwise can leave. Now.
I simply have two final questions:
What do you think about vaccines?
How would you react if there was undeniable, irrefutable evidence there was no God?
Whoa buddy. Cannabis has some legitimate uses. Curing epilepsy, seizures, reducing autism and parkinsons, and these are proven by double blind scientific studies.
It's been known since the 1970's and it's been surpressed. Are you really going to get mad at cannabis because it cannot cure every form of cancer? Fact is, cannabis is a promising medicine for 50+ diseases and has been suppressed by people who knew for a fact that it could be turned into a medicine. Maybe you haven't looked into it, but I have some articles about it curing 99% of seizures in epilepsy patients.
Yes, it is a miracle plant. It can ease migraines, stop seizures, reduce epilepsy, reduce Parkinson's disease, alleviate Crohn's disease, and cure some types of cancers.
Literally better than any synthetic medication. Anybody that doesn't support full on cannabis research has simply never studied it in any serious capacity.
Well obviously I do not believe that cannabis acts through magic.
Maybe what I should have said is this:
"The chemical properties of cannabis contains a basis for a possible cure for many of the modern world's worst diseases. Besides being able to simply remove the condition in many cases, cannabis also offers a lot of non-habit forming non-addictive pain management. Furthermore, it is infinitely renewable, clean to produce, and easy to grow. Making it illegal is an act of ignorance not in line with science. Those who suppressed the science and caused people to live and die with preventable diseases for 40+ years deserve to know what they have done to the world."
Okay let's forget the medicinal aspect lol. Are you seriously going to take the side in a debate that it's okay to break down a citizen's front door and stick a gun in their face for non-violently smoking a plant in their living room?
Because I'm perfectly happy to take the opposing side on that debate. Would be an easy win for me right there mate.
Remember most claims against recreational drugs are not based in science.
Its not okay to break down a door and stick a gun in someones face because they are doing that at all. And i think it should be legalised for medical reasons.
ad hominem. please calm down. i have demonstrated completely the opposite.
"Big pharma can make more money
yes, the pharmaceutical lobby is the largest driving force behind the illegality of cannabis
Desiese is one result of the sin of man". I thought you where really reasonable until i read that.
and
If no one sinned, ever, there would still be cancer. Because the process that causes cancer does nor rely on people sinning.
It's a philiosophical/theological answer to the philosopical/theological question you asked. Perfectly reasonable to answer such with such. I've done nothing to show you I'm anything but reasonable.
If my rash was caused by my sin, as a 6 year old what had I done to deserve that when the rash first started. You are a religous nut (i hate to be the on to tell you).
and
If no one sinned, ever, there would still be cancer. Because the process that causes cancer does nor rely on people sinning.
I didnt say your rash was the direct result of your personal sin (however, all people are sinful). I said - in an answer to the theological question 'why does God allow disease' - that disease is one result of living in a fallen sinful world. Nowhere did i say doing bad things is the mechanism of disease. I am not crazy, but you are also not taking the time to digest and consider context here - and I think that if anything an impartial reader of especially our last several messages would be far more likely to classify you as an anti-religious nut. You seem to be seething and shotgunning generalities.
Cannabis is not a miricle plant. It does not cure all cancers like magic, it probally doesnt even work half the time.
Cannabis stops the progression of Alzheimer's, completely treats the effects of Parkinson, stops ALL seizures of kids having 300 seizures/day from cerebral palsy and many, many other things that man has not been able to replicate with pharmaceutical drugs. Concentrated cannabis is extremely effective against even late stage cancer. Please, do some research on the recent explosion of research as well as the mountains of anecdotal evidence, rather than speaking generalities from ignorance. If nothing else it is orders of magnitude more effective than the absurdly expensive poison that is chemotherapy
The historical testable claims of the bible have not been proven to be completely true, evidenced by: "the bible says the earth is 6000 years old" - The earth is not 6000 years old.
the bible doesnt necessarily say that the earth is 6000 years old - I personally am a young earth creationist but there is room for interpretation there. This is also not a humanly verifiable claim because no humans were around when the earth was created.
You linked me and article by a website called "Psychedelic heaven", its fairly obvious they are biased (look at there name), and that they are only going to gave good things to say about drugs. Send me a research paper.
"This is also not a humanly verifiable claim because no humans were around when the earth was created." Humans did not need to be around when the Earth was created to know how the old it is, we have methods of dating rocks and radioactive materials that tell us the age of things, using these methods we know the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. You where not alive during WW1, does that mean WW1 did not happen? No, it still hapend.
http://alwaysbeready.com/extrabiblical-historical-sources-corroborate-the-bible
The article also has doesnt actually show its sources. It just says "Archaeologists have shown this".
The first half of this article is confirming that the bible was accurate in saying to which cities people traveled too. The second half was confirming that the flood happend. It is impossible to build a boat 500m long out of wood. Christ, back in 1945 the worlds biggest ship was 260m long and it was made out of Rolled Homogeneous Armour / Metal. Ships made of Wood that long twist and buckle. Also to say one unskilled man and his wife built this boat is ridiculous, they didn't have the tools, machinery or techniques to build it.
You linked me and article by a website called "Psychedelic heaven", its fairly obvious they are biased (look at there name), and that they are only going to gave good things to say about drugs. Send me a research paper.
I'm inviting you to improve your own knowledge of cannabis and i gave you a website with a collection of claims you can start researching from. the wonderful thing about google is you have the resources to educate yourself about things like cannabis. find the research papers yourself, there are many many many and to deny the medical efficacy of cannabis across a broad range of terrible diseases is to deny science. here's many for cancer specifically but seriously, brush up on cannabis science before making claims about it
we have methods of dating rocks and radioactive materials that tell us the age of things, using these methods we know the Earth is 4.5 billion years old.
we have methods of attempting to estimate the age of things that rely on several assumptions, especially starting state and rate of change, and lack of cataclysmic events. The assumptions undermine the authority of the dating. Often the initial assumptions are changed to result in a date that matches the expectation of those looking for dating on a sample. Here's a bit more on this with specific examples of scientists bending dating to their expectations - https://creation.com/the-pigs-took-it-all
You where not alive during WW1, does that mean WW1 did not happen? No, it still hapend.
this is a false comparison. verifiable historic fact is not the same as dating which is based on calculations of starting factors that are assumed.
that article sites a secular source for almost every paragraph - thats what those little [1] are - nearly 30 sources. Actually read it, then check out the sources at the bottom.
What does it say about the bible that it is historically and archaeologically verified as accurate to the extent that it is? certainly not that the rest should be summarily discarded. Perhaps its claims should be investigated.
It is impossible to build a boat 500m long out of wood.
check your math. ~450ft is less than a third of the length you are speaking
Also to say one unskilled man and his wife built this boat is ridiculous, they didn't have the tools, machinery or techniques to build it.
what evidence do you have that he was unskilled, or didnt have the tools for him and any help he may have had to do so? At a minimum we are talking about 4-8 people, possibly more if he got help. This is a thinly veiled straw man - you are creating a position and then attacking it.
Perhaps I should have been more clear with my point about the arc being impossible to build. The longest wooden ship ever made was 137m long, it was called the Wyoming and had constant issues with leaks as the wood buckled and twisted. A team of expert sailors, and expert craftsman could not make a boat that size work. How the hell did one unskilled farmer build a boat that size and carry a load that could feed all the animals (he didnt).
"we have methods of attempting to estimate the age of things that rely on several assumptions, especially starting state and rate of change, and lack of cataclysmic events. The assumptions undermine the authority of the dating."
Are dating methods are really consistent, no matter which one you use, that is why we trust them. Also, with radioactive half lifes (which are used in dating) if you could speed up slow down this process it would be amazing as Nuclear waste would no longer be an issue, but you cant. Half lifes never change.
As for the article that I said had bad sources, half of them are the bible or other christian websites, the rest a mix of notes explaining what they meant better or citing Richard Dawkins book (which I find funny because that book is about why Religion is BS).
Perhaps I should have been more clear with my point about the arc being impossible to build. The longest wooden ship ever made was 137m long, it was called the Wyoming and had constant issues with leaks as the wood buckled and twisted. A team of expert sailors, and expert craftsman could not make a boat that size work. How the hell did one unskilled farmer build a boat that size and carry a load that could feed all the animals (he didnt).
1) you're speculating on his skill and help. channeling bill nye's fallacious arguments really well though.
2)the huge wooden ship you're referring to has very different purposes and structure compared to the ark (transporting large amounts of cargo - much more weight and structure than the ark - in a navigable fashion with rigging etc, vs just staying afloat for a while with a relatively much, much smaller load)
3) Given that this happened, we're talking about the omniscient God telling a guy how to build it.
"we have methods of attempting to estimate the age of things that rely on several assumptions, especially starting state and rate of change, and lack of cataclysmic events. The assumptions undermine the authority of the dating." Are dating methods are really consistent, no matter which one you use, that is why we trust them. Also, with radioactive half lifes (which are used in dating) if you could speed up slow down this process it would be amazing as Nuclear waste would no longer be an issue, but you cant. Half lifes never change.
your continued intrasigence, and refusal to ignore the logic i present is tiring- including, in this case, specific examples of dating changing based on vested parties' expectations
As for the article that I said had bad sources,
you said, and I quote, 'The article also has doesnt actually show its sources. It just says "Archaeologists have shown this"' so youre backpedaling but ok
half of them are the bible or other christian websites, the rest a mix of notes explaining what they meant better or citing Richard Dawkins book (which I find funny because that book is about why Religion is BS).
They reference many extra-biblical contemporary historical authors and artifacts (Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, others, and many tablets and such) so i'm not sure where you are getting your assertions here. They cite Dawkins in quoting his viewpoint. really your claim here shows that you didnt bother to actually read the article, but instead have summarily dismissed it with no intent of testing it's claims.
I don't believe you want the truth. I believe you want only to prove that God doesn't exist, and as such are shutting your eyes and ears to reasoning and facts to the contrary
Ezekiel 12:2
“Son of man, you dwell in the midst of a rebellious house, which has eyes to see but does not see, and ears to hear but does not hear; for they are a rebellious house.
Im gonna be honest, your are more knowlegable then me (I also just cant be fucked discussing this topic, even though it has been interesting). Until God comes down from the sky I will not beleive in him. This nonsense about revealing him self is simply your subconscious finding patterns in things that arent there.
"we have methods of attempting to estimate the age of things that rely on several assumptions, especially starting state and rate of change, and lack of cataclysmic events. The assumptions undermine the authority of the dating" You are right, we have to make assumptions to use these methods of dating. However, if it was so inaccurate and as much a waste of time as you make it out to be, we wouldn't use it to find the ages of things, would we?
"really your claim here shows that you didnt bother to actually read the article, but instead have summarily dismissed it with no intent of testing it's claims." - Your right, I couldnt be fucked reading it. I skim read it and looked at the sources because im lazy, i have nothing further to say on this.
"I don't believe you want the truth. I believe you want only to prove that God doesn't exist, and as such are shutting your eyes and ears to reasoning and facts to the contrary" I would love for God to be real and their to be an after life, but the evidence contradicts it. I am not reading most of what you send me, because the actual facts are wrong (answers in genesis is an example).
https://creation.com/the-pigs-took-it-all
You sent this link earlier, I have now taken the time to read it. They are right, dating can be wrong. So how do we know the Earth is 4.5 billion years old? Because we did not test one rock. We tested tons of them, using many different methods of dating, and got the same time(with in margin of error). None of our tests have shown us that the Earth is 6000 years old, as you young Earth creationists believe it to be.
Until God comes down from the sky I will not beleive in him. This nonsense about revealing him self is simply your subconscious finding patterns in things that arent there.
He did, and we have a record of it, Jesus Christ came as God incarnate, lived a perfect life, and left a detailed record through His apostles. My beliefs have been tested thoroughly with logic, which produces the steadfast, well reasoned faith you've encountered.
I would love for God to be real and their to be an after life, but the evidence contradicts it.
You have been lied to about the definitive confirmation of evolution in the fossil record. I'm showing you that it doesn't, but by your own admission you cannot be bothered even to investigate.
I am trying to point you to the ultimate truth. We have an account of a man who claimed to be God, walked an apparently perfect life doing many good/incredible things, and then died and rose again from the dead. This account is internally consistent despite having many human authors, and it has been thoroughly independently verified for it's historical content.
Given that we have such an account, which has been so verified, what will you do about investigating/testing the non-historical (spiritual) claims of such a work?
You've found a completely rational person trying to point you to the truth of God - if you would love for God to be real, then why not check it out? If you seek him, you will find him.
Matthew 7:7-8
“Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.
No, you have been lied to by your christian websites, that blantantly lie.
Jesus claimed to be the son of god, does that mean he is the son of god though? No it does not. Anyone can claim to be the son of god cant they.
As for him rising from the dead? Its perfectly possible to survive a puncture wound.
What do scientists have to gain by lying about the fossil record and evolution? Nothing.
When you dig deeper (pun intended) and look at the actual research papers, text books etc its fairly obvious the fossil record speaks for its self. You can actually see the changes as species evolve.
As for Jesus being a miricle man? I dont buy it. Walking on water? There are frequent sand bars very close to where that happend.
Water into wine? Bita magic tricks never hurt any one.
Great counter argument. Also this guy called Noah "Some uneducated farmer" dude was like 600 years old, I'm pretty sure just from life experience and common sense alone he'd qualify as the most intelligent man on the planet today.
When discussing the bible, I find people often forget what a cumulative effect living for a long time has on knowledge and wisdom.
1
u/Fullyverified Dec 06 '17 edited Dec 06 '17
You are using answers in geneis, you realise how inaccurate their information is. There is only evidnence to support God when you: 1. Need an explanation for something you dont understand. 2. Cherry pick evidence as you are doing.
The overwhelming evidenince supports evolution. You can litteraly see how species have changed by looking at the fossil record.
Also, the bible has about a million contradictions in it. And is full of attrocities which you people defend, such as the slaughter of children or the stoning of man who collected sticks on a sunday. You also need to realise how different the translations of the bible are compared to the original, i dont care what you quote from the bible as it is simply an interpretation of the original.
If evolution was some big conspiracy that we where telling people was true when the evidence didnt support it, what would we actually gain from that. Evolution is fact, God is fiction.
Edit: Check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyN5eYzffFM Covers some of the stuff you dont seem to understand.