This is how Atheism is wrong.

[RV_Wizard]

5 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

You think water and earth are alive?

Where did that madness come form?  I neither said nor implied such foolishness.

 

5 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

As you've seen the text itself tells us that the "yom" of creation are not literal 24-hour days.   

Not only does the text confirm they were single literal days, the Forth Commandment specifically cites the six-day creation.  Sorry, but you are wrong. 

[The Barbarian]

4 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Where did that madness come form?  I neither said nor implied such foolishness.

God says that life was brought forth as He intended, by non-living matter.   You should believe Him.

As you've seen the text itself tells us that the "yom" of creation are not literal 24-hour days.

5 minutes ago, RV_Wizard said:

Not only does the text confirm they were single literal days, the Forth Commandment specifically cites the six-day creation. 

No, that's wrong.   As early Christians noted, Hebrew would not allow for mornings and evenings without the sun that defined them.   And if your argument is that a later verse, citing an earlier figurative verse, changes it to a literal history, I'd need to see your evidence for that.    What do you have?

 

[RV_Wizard]

13 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

God says that life was brought forth as He intended, by non-living matter.   You should believe Him.

God said He created all living things beginning with plants and trees on day three and ending with man on day six.  You should believe Him.

13 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

As early Christians noted, Hebrew would not allow for mornings and evenings without the sun that defined them.   

Early Christians would not be able to differentiate between the sun which shines light on the earth and another light source which did the exact same thing.  From this source the sun, moon and stars were created.  We know this because there isn't another entity called "light" illuminating the earth today. Maybe "light" was in the same position as the sun; just alone in the darkness of the void.  Maybe it was closer or further away.  Regardless, whether you call the source of illumination light, the sun or Fred, evening and morning is caused by the rotation of the earth relative to a light source.  The Bible is not the word of Hebrews,  It is the word of God.

[Guest]

(Genesis 2:7)  then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.  [ESV]

The breath of God brought life to the inanimate.  God's breath brought life to the inanimate object He exquisitely formed and man became a living creature.

[Bawb]

On 3/1/2021 at 3:09 PM, The Barbarian said:

That's a different issue.  As you just learned, God says that life came from non-living matter. 

TRUTH!

A really good evangelistic approach is one that Ray Comfort of Living Waters uses: Without a painter there is no painting. Without a builder there is no building. So how can one look at creation and say there is no creator?

How can things that are so intricate and yet so co-dependent, even within the same body, NOT be created all at once? BY the CREATOR!

[teddyv]

2 hours ago, Bawb said:

TRUTH!

A really good evangelistic approach is one that Ray Comfort of Living Waters uses: Without a painter there is no painting. Without a builder there is no building. So how can one look at creation and say there is no creator?

How can things that are so intricate and yet so co-dependent, even within the same body, NOT be created all at once? BY the CREATOR!

The last paragraph is an appeal of personal incredulity. I agree it's all pretty amazing, but that does not mean there is no answers beyond fiat creation.

[David1701]

1 hour ago, teddyv said:

The last paragraph is an appeal of personal incredulity. I agree it's all pretty amazing, but that does not mean there is no answers beyond fiat creation.

There are no true answers, beyond biblical creation.

Unbelievers have exerted their best intellect, to come up with "evolution" and billions of years for the age of the earth (needed for evolution to have even a shred of plausibility in their minds); but, those who believe the Lord know that he created the heavens, the earth and everything in them, in six days, each with a morning and an evening.

[Waggles]

2 hours ago, David1701 said:

but, those who believe the Lord know that he created the heavens, the earth and everything in them, in six days, each with a morning and an evening.

Some who believe in the Lord believe this, but others with wisdom know that Genesis does not in the original Hebrew teach this.

[teddyv]

5 hours ago, David1701 said:

There are no true answers, beyond biblical creation.

Unbelievers have exerted their best intellect, to come up with "evolution" and billions of years for the age of the earth (needed for evolution to have even a shred of plausibility in their minds); but, those who believe the Lord know that he created the heavens, the earth and everything in them, in six days, each with a morning and an evening.

As I will remind you, you yourself stated a couple weeks ago that you have little knowledge and interest in geology.

I know a few things about geology and there is little that conforms to the YEC when examining the full breadth of the evidence at hand. There is more than the Grand Canyon and dinosaurs and polystrate fossils. 

YEC sticks to the geology that might fit, but seem to shy away from the full scope. They stick to things that can seem logical to the layperson but are misrepresenting the full story. They love to take the exception and make it the rule. They love to poke holes, but never create a coherent, parsimonious explanation. A good theory needs to account for all observations but AiG et al seem reticent on that point. Anyway, they seem more interested in building monuments and fighting their culture war. They are well down the evolution road now too. Just shoe-horning it in a 6000 year time frame 

And I will once again state that YEC is a poor interpretation because it is lensing the Bible through modernity and ignoring its original audience and culture.

My feeling though - correct me I'm wrong because I don't want to lump all young earthers together - that you are arguing primarily from a theological point, which is fair enough. That's fine, I do understand. I've just got enough education and working experience in geology that I know it is untenable, or least without a lot more work on the YEC's part. Current theories work, and work well.

[David1701]

13 hours ago, teddyv said:

As I will remind you, you yourself stated a couple weeks ago that you have little knowledge and interest in geology.

I know a few things about geology and there is little that conforms to the YEC when examining the full breadth of the evidence at hand. There is more than the Grand Canyon and dinosaurs and polystrate fossils. 

YEC sticks to the geology that might fit, but seem to shy away from the full scope. They stick to things that can seem logical to the layperson but are misrepresenting the full story. They love to take the exception and make it the rule. They love to poke holes, but never create a coherent, parsimonious explanation. A good theory needs to account for all observations but AiG et al seem reticent on that point. Anyway, they seem more interested in building monuments and fighting their culture war. They are well down the evolution road now too. Just shoe-horning it in a 6000 year time frame 

And I will once again state that YEC is a poor interpretation because it is lensing the Bible through modernity and ignoring its original audience and culture.

My feeling though - correct me I'm wrong because I don't want to lump all young earthers together - that you are arguing primarily from a theological point, which is fair enough. That's fine, I do understand. I've just got enough education and working experience in geology that I know it is untenable, or least without a lot more work on the YEC's part. Current theories work, and work well.

How arrogant can you get!  It's this kind of condescending attitude (putting your scientific "knowledge" above the Bible and those who believe it) that often puts Bible believers off science altogether (sadly).

YEC, as you call it, is simply believing what the Bible says about creation.  Anything else is refusing to believe it, no matter what spin you might want to place on that.