Evidence for God from Science

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:That is irrelevant to my point.I'm talking about societies that have been indoctrinated many times before I'm not really arguing the bible right now,just making a point about indoctrination of societies of the past and why I don't trust what man says is true especially without evidence.

It's not irrelevant, you just missed my point (although I probably wasn't very clear). It is definitely possible that you are the one that has been deceived, since you interpretation is just the words of a man based on very flimsy evidence and what I believe to be a faulty understanding of God's word and an incorrect translation of God's word. Evolution is not indoctrination, it is the best theory we have to explain all the evidence, it may change with newer evidence as time goes by, if it was indoctrinated it would not be subject to change and review, it would be 100% concrete.

You are overlooking that I give evidence to back up what I believe and my interpretation which is something I've ever seen from you or any one who accepts evolution.I come with evidence while you and others just declare evolution true or just believe it.Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

Your "evidence" has been refuted already and I don't bother presenting mine because it is widely available on the net, but which you already reject because they are "the words of men", so what's the point!!!

It's like talking to a brick wall.

If you want to look at it from my point of view I would suggest reading all the books that Neo listued (can't remember where, search his posts) and go to Bio Logos and other such websites (not that I agree with everything they say, but meh it's a good start).

You give excuses while I can back up what I believe with evidence.Read through my posts above and you'll see evidence,while in yours you just declare.

Audie wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:The bible tells us in 2nd Peter 3:3-7 that a former world perished and yet my evidence that a former world that existed that perished is all of the fossils ,coal and oil zand evidence of much life that died and went extinct,this is what we would find and we do.You need to stop looking at the evidence of a former world that existed that perished from an evolution perspective,because your interpretation is flawed,the evidence screams out a former world full of life perished before God created this world,but Peter also tells us that this world has not gone on since the beginning Genesis 1:1 so you can believe evolution that teaches "since our fathers died,all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation" or you can believe God's word that it has not gone on for millions of years.There was a gap you have overlooked.

You are reading a faulty translation, Jac has already refuted it. The Bible never says there were two worlds.

There have been multiple "previous worlds" in the sense that conditions various points in the past would be profoundly
different than what we know today. Its a pity, when people wont take time to learn how to appreciate the beauty, wonder and mystery of what has gone has gone before.

Well that is not what science teaches,they always make sure at least some life survives through extinction events so that life can evolve like with "snow ball earth" which I brought up before to you,evolution keeps this thing going on for millions of years because of evolution and the belief life evolves,you see dinosaurs are evidence of the kind of life that existed in the former world but to an evolutionist dinosaurs evolved into birds.Also we know in the flood that flooded both the heavens and the earth that caused the former world to perish,God caused the heavens to be black,which means no sun light,which means the earth freezing and everything dying and yet we have wooly mommoths with food still in their mouth which means they were eating and frozen suddenly it proves a quick freeze,a supernatural act by God.

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:That is irrelevant to my point.I'm talking about societies that have been indoctrinated many times before I'm not really arguing the bible right now,just making a point about indoctrination of societies of the past and why I don't trust what man says is true especially without evidence.

It's not irrelevant, you just missed my point (although I probably wasn't very clear). It is definitely possible that you are the one that has been deceived, since you interpretation is just the words of a man based on very flimsy evidence and what I believe to be a faulty understanding of God's word and an incorrect translation of God's word. Evolution is not indoctrination, it is the best theory we have to explain all the evidence, it may change with newer evidence as time goes by, if it was indoctrinated it would not be subject to change and review, it would be 100% concrete.

You are overlooking that I give evidence to back up what I believe and my interpretation which is something I've ever seen from you or any one who accepts evolution.I come with evidence while you and others just declare evolution true or just believe it.Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

Your "evidence" has been refuted already and I don't bother presenting mine because it is widely available on the net, but which you already reject because they are "the words of men", so what's the point!!!

It's like talking to a brick wall.

If you want to look at it from my point of view I would suggest reading all the books that Neo listued (can't remember where, search his posts) and go to Bio Logos and other such websites (not that I agree with everything they say, but meh it's a good start).

You give excuses while I can back up what I believe with evidence.Read through my posts above and you'll see evidence,while in yours you just declare.

All of your "evidence" is a non starter because the translation of the text is wrong and has been shown to be wrong, your evidence is worthless and your whole argument cannot make it past the first hurdle.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:te="abelcainsbrother"]That is irrelevant to my point.I'm talking about societies that have been indoctrinated many times before I'm not really arguing the bible right now,just making a point about indoctrination of societies of the past and why I don't trust what man says is true especially without evidence.

It's not irrelevant, you just missed my point (although I probably wasn't very clear). It is definitely possible that you are the one that has been deceived, since you interpretation is just the words of a man based on very flimsy evidence and what I believe to be a faulty understanding of God's word and an incorrect translation of God's word. Evolution is not indoctrination, it is the best theory we have to explain all the evidence, it may change with newer evidence as time goes by, if it was indoctrinated it would not be subject to change and review, it would be 100% concrete.

You are overlooking that I give evidence to back up what I believe and my interpretation which is something I've ever seen from you or any one who accepts evolution.I come with evidence while you and others just declare evolution true or just believe it.Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

Your "evidence" has been refuted already and I don't bother presenting mine because it is widely available on the net, but which you already reject because they are "the words of men", so what's the point!!!

It's like talking to a brick wall.

If you want to look at it from my point of view I would suggest reading all the books that Neo listued (can't remember where, search his posts) and go to Bio Logos and other such websites (not that I agree with everything they say, but meh it's a good start).

You give excuses while I can back up what I believe with evidence.Read through my posts above and you'll see evidence,while in yours you just declare.

:poun

d: All of your "evidence" is a non starter because the translation of the text is wrong and has been shown to be wrong, your evidence is worthless and your whole argument cannot make it past the first hurdle.

[/quote]

Wrong.the text tells us the heavens and earth that were of old were flooded which caused the former world to perish.Jac and others tries to make Noah's flood fit here overlooking that only the earth was flooded in Noah's flood,not the heavens and earth like in this flood.You just don't want to look for evidence for a former world that perished like I do.Evolution is wrong anyway even if you deny the gap theory.!

abelcainsbrother wrote:
Wrong.the text tells us the heavens and earth that were of old were flooded which caused the former world to perish.Had tries to make Noah's flood fit here overlooking that only the earth was flooded in Noah's flood,not the heavens and earth like in this flood.You just don't want to look for evidence for a former world that perished like I do.Evolution is wrong anyway even if you deny the gap theory.!

You saying what the text says are just the words of man, I believe the evidence and as Jac pointed out with the translational error, that it is equal to the JW's believing Jesus is a god, the translation is wrong and you draw your conclusions from that translational error which puts all your "evidence" in the waste paper basket. The grave is dug my friend, you have just as much proof for Gap Theory as the deceived EVILOUTIONISTS. which makes you just as deceived. So welcome to the botherhood of deceived men and woman.

abelcainsbrother wrote:Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

You're funny.

Morny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

You're funny.

I like to feed the because as he grows so does the bull crud and everyone can see it for what it is.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Morny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

You're funny.

I like to feed the because as he grows so does the bull crud and everyone can see it for what it is.

Come on... is ACB really a troll?
I mean he's just as adamant about his beliefs as anyone else, but...
I don't know.

Kurieuo wrote:

Danieltwotwenty wrote:

Morny wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:Just like above with Morny he does not give evidence but just gives scientistific rhetoric trying to appear smarter,when evidence is what he should be giving.

You're funny.

I like to feed the because as he grows so does the bull crud and everyone can see it for what it is.

Come on... is ACB really a troll?
I mean he's just as adamant about his beliefs as anyone else, but...
I don't know.

I am seriously not sure whether he is one or not, I mean some of the posts are just plain ludicrous and it's the same thing over and over again, I feel like he is just trying to get a reaction and that is why I treat his posts as a bit of a joke.............................. or maybe he is serious and if he is then well...............

For what it's worth Abel, I don't think the gap theory is as easily dismissed as others may think. I'm not about to get into a debate over it though, being that I'm not 100% sure.
When I first came on here I was a Christian who had quite deliberately shied away from creation theology, theology and/or any doctrine outside of the bible. In that sense I was niave. I had previously seen others at church and bible studies get in very heated theological debates and thought 'they can have it', so I just read the bible and tried to learn the most fundamental lessons especially the words of Jesus.
So when I was a newbie I jumped on a creation thread and stated that we couldn't know for certain but I leaned towards a belief, I stated what I thought and I was informed that it was the gap theory. I had come to that conclusion purely based on my own interpretation. Since then I have read a lot regarding creation theology, I still think no-one can know for certain, some other beliefs have really pipped my interest but I certainly by no means have ruled out the Gap Theory. If I had to place a bet, my money's still there

ACB, why do you think virtually no current evangelical Hebrew scholar believes the wording of Genesis can support the Gap Theory? These are people who believe the text is true, that it's God's Word, who have studied it to an exhaustive scholar's depth, and yet they overwhelmingly say the text does not and cannot support Gap Theory. It sounds to me like you like it because you think it solves problems and matches the evidences. But the scholars and theologians overwhelmingly reject that. Doesn't that at least make you wonder why that's the case?

I shy away from them because I am not an expert in the field and really to be honest I just don't care that much, I am constantly amazed how much people actually give a damn when there are children starving, countries imploding, people being used and abused, people being slaughtered in the millions and on and on I could go. The message of the Gospel is important, this is just crapola that gets in the way of people knowing who Christ is and that's what makes me angry The narrow mindedness of some people drives other people away from Christ and it makes me sick and ashamed to be associated with these people.

BELIEVE WHATEVER YOU WANT TO BELIEVE ABOUT THE EARTH, IT DOES NOT MATTER ONE IOTA, IT HAS NO ETERNAL CONSEQUENCE, IT DOES NOT HELP FEED THE POOR OR CLOTH CHILDREN AND IT WILL NOT SAVE YOU, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You may carry on.

BELIEVE WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO BELIEVE ABOUT THE EARTH, IT DOES NOT MATTER ONE IOTA, IT HAS NO ETERNAL CONSEQUENCE, IT DOES NOT HELP FEED THE POOR OR CLOTH CHILDREN AND IT WILL NOT SAVE YOU, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dan, While I agree there are far more important issues, it's not unreasonable to debate the merits of this particular issue - just as you yourself have often debated other issues (like evolution) that won't feed "children starving." And, does it not hurt our witness to others if we just pretend we don't think deeply about Biblical issues we wonder about? Many unbelievers have doubts that center around the topic of this thread. Many believers do as well.

Philip wrote:

BELIEVE WHAT EVER YOU WANT TO BELIEVE ABOUT THE EARTH, IT DOES NOT MATTER ONE IOTA, IT HAS NO ETERNAL CONSEQUENCE, IT DOES NOT HELP FEED THE POOR OR CLOTH CHILDREN AND IT WILL NOT SAVE YOU, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dan, While I agree there are far more important issues, it's not unreasonable to debate the merits of this particular issue - just as you yourself have often debated other issues (like evolution) that won't feed "children starving." And, does it not hurt our witness to others if we just pretend we don't think deeply about Biblical issues we wonder about? Many unbelievers have doubts that center around the topic of this thread. Many believers do as well.

Oh I agree, I just mean't some people place way to much importance on it, to the point were they look down on others, drive people away from Christ, their interpretation is equal to God's words, we believe the words of men, we are deceived by the devil etc... etc.. I don't mind talking about it but when someone tells me I have been deceived by the devil and that we are all evilutionists, I draw the line in the sand right there.

For me personally, I draw the line in the sand if I'm told I've been deceived by the devil for being a globalist.