Creation

[masonlandry]

23 minutes ago, Scott Free said:

Sure, here are some links offering professional archaeological data. 

Were Hebrews Ever Slaves in Ancient Egypt? Yes

Were Jews Ever Really Slaves in Egypt, or Is Passover a Myth?

Did you read those? Specifically the second one. The first one says pretty much what you said it did, but the second one was decidedly on the side of it not being supported at all. From the link:

"The reality is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Jews were ever enslaved in Egypt. Yes, there's the story contained within the bible itself, but that's not a remotely historically admissible source. I'm talking about real proof; archeological evidence, state records and primary sources. Of these, nothing exists."

[masonlandry]

31 minutes ago, Yowm said:

So the Exodus you question whereas other historical events get a pass? Or do you hold in doubt all non modern history?

I definitely hold doubt about all ancient history. 

[masonlandry]

38 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Why does it matter? To you? Sounds quite selfish and subjective. Will your thoughts be the same on your deathbed?

Why does it matter to me? Because I'm experiencing it. The only other option is to commit suicide, and I have no wish to do that. Perhaps it is selfish, but that's not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself. Usually, it's in my self-interest to  bear other people in mind when I consider the consequences of my actions. It matters to me that the people I love care about me and are impacted what I do. 

I have no idea what my thoughts will be on my deathbed since I can't predict the future, but I'm not afraid of death or whatever comes after it, if anything.

[masonlandry]

15 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Do you ever wonder out of billions and billions of years and a similar distance of light years, you happen to appear in this place at this time?

Was that by chance or design?

The odds of me being alive now are exactly the same as the odds of me being alive at any other possible time. Just like the odds of being dealt a hand of 4 aces is exactly the same as being dealt a hand of any random set of 4 cards. It only seems sp ciql because the outcome has significance to us. Personally. You would ask the same question no matter when you were alive. 

[Scott Free]

18 minutes ago, masonlandry said:

"The reality is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the Jews were ever enslaved in Egypt. Yes, there's the story contained within the bible itself, but that's not a remotely historically admissible source. I'm talking about real proof; archeological evidence, state records and primary sources. Of these, nothing exists."

You are right, there is no empirical evidence for Israelite being slaves in Egypt. That is the best i can offer. The problem with evidence is the Nile Delta is to wet to preserve archaeological information for 3500 years. This is true for all Egyptology research.

 

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

Wrong.   It doesn't  mean all of those things in Genesis 1.   You can't simply pick any of those and plug them into Genesis 1.   In Genesis yom is only used to refer to literal days and it has sufficient modifiers to support that.

You are getting off track. My point was that the word "yom" is flexible and has multiple different uses in the Bible. I did not refer specifically to Genesis 1.

Quote

The word yom is flexible and can mean more than a 24 hour period.

Your response seems to ignore many of the Biblical uses of the word in the Bible.

Quote

Only in certain contexts such as in prophecy that contain the phrase "in that day"  where it means, "at that time."

This seemed very curious to me since it doesn't at all match the reality regarding the use of "yom" throughout the Bible, which is why I showed you a screenshot from the concordance. I was completely correct in my assertion that yom has multiple uses throughout the Bible and have supplied evidence for it.

But moving on...

You further claim:

Quote

Evolution is not anything except atheistic.

This is incorrect. Evolution is a best guess to explain many scientific observations about biological change over time. It is neither theistic nor atheistic. It is limited by science to what can be physically observed, measured, or tested - it does not address the supernatural. Has the idea of evolution been misused? Absolutely! But history is full of misuse of ideas, like the misuse of Christianity in the Spanish Inquisition.

Quote

Evolution is a godless process because the theory is wholly naturalistic, impersonal, and unguided.

No, the version of evolution you seek to refute is as you describe it. I refute that version of evolution, as well. Clearly, if I believe God used evolution, then it is NOT wholly naturalistic, and NOT impersonal, and NOT unguided. Again, I do not at all dispute that God (and only God) is the creator of all things.

Quote

No, I am not addressing a strawman.

Yes, you are. Repeatedly. Every single time you claim evolution is atheistic when you argue with me, you raise a strawman. Because if God used it, then it is not atheistic. You can use that argument with an atheist without the obvious logical fallacy, but you cannot do that with me.

[Scott Free]

8 minutes ago, masonlandry said:

The odds of me being alive now are exactly the same as the odds of me being alive at any other possible time.

Half of all humans born throughout history are alive today. You had a 50/50 chance of being born in the past 50 years. 

[one.opinion]

45 minutes ago, pinacled said:

The theory of evolution is a myth. And there are very few scientific papers and work taught publicly that prove the fallacies.

I can think if one good reason why there are so few scientific papers discrediting evolution ?

[Guest shiloh357]

 

 

13 hours ago, masonlandry said:

I'm here to talk about what's being talked about. I don't care if people believe or not. But if someone brings up an argument I think is wrong, I don't see any reason why I shouldnt say so, especially in a forum dedicated to science and religion. 

Morals, from an evolutionary perspective, evolved over millions of years just like everything else. There are ways to behave that are conducive to a social species, and ways that are not. And lots of areas in between. There are things you can do that are better for yourself, for your family, your community, and onward, and we see these things as moral. The better they are for everyone over time, the more moral. And the reverse, if something is bad for society, we consider it immoral, the more impact it has on the more people, the worse we consider it. No single person. Dictates what the "right" rules are. What a particular community sees as moral depends on how people demand other members of the community action, or else they don't get to be a part of it or they won't pass on the genes that predicate them to behave that way. This is the case whether the community is local, national, global, etc. The bigger the community, the fewer things we'll have in common. The closer and smaller the community, the more things they will have in common. That's why you see some basic moral understanding that pretty much everyone is clear on across time and across cultures, and so many variences in morals and ethics across the same. 

So if communities adopt Nazi values, believe that Nazi values are beneficial to them, then we can say that Nazism  is moral?  If the whole world adopted Nazism, would Nazism be moral?   Would it be moral to murder even if the whole world accepted murder as "moral?"

Morals don't "evolve."  

[enoob57]

16 hours ago, masonlandry said:

Yeah, they all die. What difference does that make? Does something have to last forever to matter to you? I've never felt that way. I'll gladly eat ice cream even though I know it will be finished pretty quickly. Doesn't mean I thought it was pointless to eat it. My life may be meaningless to the universe as a whole, but it sure matters a lot to me now. 

metaphysical realities move probabilities way past entropy... and the calculation of such becomes irrational to say the least! 

16 hours ago, masonlandry said:

I definitely hold doubt about all ancient history. 

as I said to you 'all' scenarios based off of empirical requirements become faith based... the fact you pick an choose within that total set of what you will and will not accept places you in a hypocrisy... nothing like the bloat of humanism to make oneself grand  

Edited December 7, 2018 by enoob57