MrsRational Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 2 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 150 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/09/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 06/01/1984 Share Posted January 20, 2014 The great thing about fantasy conversations is they always go our way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Author Share Posted January 20, 2014 The great thing about fantasy conversations is they always go our way. The purpose, though, is to use a different method of explaining one's point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 The great thing about fantasy conversations is they always go our way. The purpose, though, is to use a different method of explaining one's point. Yeah, but it comes off as more than that. Your envisioned conversation doesn't really deal with the actual claims we make. It was a very lopsided conversatoin where "S" makes well reasoned arguments while "C" has nothing meaningful or substantve to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Author Share Posted January 20, 2014 The great thing about fantasy conversations is they always go our way. The purpose, though, is to use a different method of explaining one's point. Yeah, but it comes off as more than that. Your envisioned conversation doesn't really deal with the actual claims we make. It was a very lopsided conversatoin where "S" makes well reasoned arguments while "C" has nothing meaningful or substantve to offer. I was expressing my frustration. If you will notice, "S" didn't say anything substantial either, just asked questions. And like I said from the beginning, anyone can add their own dialogue. A couple of the guys here did that.I thought it made things interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,254 Content Per Day: 7.98 Reputation: 21,499 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Enoch, with that mindset, you might as well just turn off the telescopes like Hubble and SOHO, shut down the radio observatories like Greenbank and the Very Large Array, and every observatory around the globe, and miss out on all the cool and useful technologies that have come out of the space program because in your mind observational science is not "real" science. Likewise, you need to not listen to Creationists who point to the dramatic landscape changes, formation of a petrified forest, and rapid ecological recovery around Mt. St. Helens, because all of that is being reported from observational science as well. What other mindset can a YEC have? They have to find a way to deny any science that does not agree with their interpretation of Genesis 1. To the YEC crowd Edwin Hubble is a snake oil salesman and Ken Ham is the ultimate authority. the assumption that YEC needs outside of it's own fact of 'IS' ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,254 Content Per Day: 7.98 Reputation: 21,499 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Hey Enoch,Do you clench your fist when you hear any or all of these words- Hubble, COBE, WMAP, and Planck.I'll bet you do. No I perceive that by the logic and accuracy of His facts he doesn't feel threatened by that whichcomes against it... Simple logic the eternal conclusion 'IS' cannot be 'not' but the present conclusion'not' proclaims itself as 'IS' hence the confusion of sin! Love, Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,254 Content Per Day: 7.98 Reputation: 21,499 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 20, 2014 My objection all along. AIG and ICR and others are more interested in debunkiing than in original research and proposing alternative scientific hypotheses. They claim no one in the community takes them seriously, but who is to blame for that?My understanding from God is thus: the place we are born in 'IS' darkness and theand the light of truth must be rejected by the overwhelming darkness that isthe first begin from which all have been born! As that which is few must agreeto truthMatt 7:1414 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way,which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.KJVjust as the permeation of light into the darkness >NO< but as light thenno darkness remains... so truth and lie... so fact and error- CHOOSE-as evolution of any sort has God building upon death in the firstrepresentation of Himself through creation- How foolish is this? Theeternal God of Life building upon death to proclaim Himself throughthat same creation as Life-John 14:66 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, andthe life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.KJVI Know 'not' cannot be 'IS' and Life cannot be built upon death!Rom 1:2020 For the invisible things of him from the creation ofthe world are clearly seen, being understood by the thingsthat are made, even his eternal power and Godhead;so that they are without excuse:KJVRemember the rock and sand... choose wisely the foundation from which we areto build as we are to build upon the rock- which 'IS' Christ The Lord anddeath in His first creative act was choice not 'IS' ...Love, Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spock Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,239 Content Per Day: 0.86 Reputation: 1,686 Days Won: 6 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2014 S: hey c, what about starlight? We are seeing light from stars wayyyyyyyyy longer than 10,000 years old. C: there you go again s, wanting to talk science while all I want to talk about is the Bible and Hebrew grammar. S: take for instance this supernova that was observed in 1987 that came from the large magellinic cloud galaxy not to far from our own galaxy. It has been determined through several independent studies that the light from this supernova explosion occurred 167,000 light years ago. Obviously, that is way more than 10,000. C: good question s, and I don't have an answer right now. But let me check and see if Answers in Genesis has one. They are pretty good at doing that (coming up with rebuttals whenever science comes out with something new.) S: do they have open minded scientists working there in AIG? C: I think they are, but of course, they are not allowed to share any study or finding that would oppose their mission, which is to pooh pooh any science discovery that can possibly question the six day creation account. S: what about all the Christian scientists who support an old earth? Do you consider their work knowing that they too have the Holy Spirit guiding their lives? C: no, like I told you, we don't trust science or scientists even the ones who bow their knee to Jesus. They obviously sold their birthright like Esau did. Disclaimer: a wee bit of a hyperbole with tongue in cheek, but was done to make a point or two. (Good writing does that at times.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spock Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,239 Content Per Day: 0.86 Reputation: 1,686 Days Won: 6 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2014 Thank you Nebula for that post, it is good to see where people are coming from. YEC delayed my conversion for a few years and I guess because of that I tend to get a chip on my shoulder. These sorts of discussions would be much better if people (and myself included) would just post what they believe and why vice trying to prove the other person wrong. To say that something is not science or that it is just fantasy does not help the situation and causes people such as myself to go on the defensive. I apologize to all for losing my cool and being so defensive. Great testimonies here from both nebula and LFA. Mine isn't to dissimilar. I was so conflicted by being forced to exclude science because "God said it so it must be this way" influence. Finally, I realized the distinction between what God said and what people interpret God said can be two different things. I also believe God challenged me to help people see that he is the greatest scientist and that good, honest, and reliable science does support him, and is not against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 20, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 20, 2014 Hey Enoch, Do you clench your fist when you hear any or all of these words- Hubble, COBE, WMAP, and Planck. I'll bet you do. What are those? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.03b9a592ab3fbf402fba028ca0d40a97.thumb.jpg.2258d605d3ad1f34b6effde23d20e7d7.jpg)
Recommended Posts