Again this is your belief.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
In reality more credible and plausible sources than you have said it is a religion and so it is.
|
Again this is your belief.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
In reality more credible and plausible sources than you have said it is a religion and so it is.
No that is not my belief. Just as Secular Humanism is not a belief.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
It is understanding of the English Language and the meaning of individual words.
Why don't you PROVE that the explanations I gave for both Secular and Humanism are intrinsically incorrect ?
Because you can not, is it not ? Another show of your invalid way of argumentation...
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE]Lol.. are you serious right now? IS this what you really think secular humanism is? An understanding of the english language? LolQuote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
I am not even going to waist my time.. lolQuote:
Why don't you PROVE that the explanations I gave for both Secular and Humanism are intrinsically incorrect ?
No, actually your are wasting almost every other persons time here...Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
:rolleyes:
I am glad you changed your slogan from that " i will believe when i see it" because it became very apparent that it was not the case. You believe a lot of things that you have not witnessed or seen conclusive evidence for. :)Quote:
CREDo's New credo.. All one has to do is add "I believe" in front of (religious) claims to provide them with at least some validity...
Another of your unsupported belief statements which you insist to be factual. How sad...Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
:rolleyes:
So do you have 100% factual evidence for your wild claims?Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Now you REALLY start to "sound" stupid : I repeatedly mention that Evolution and the Origin of the Universe are for a major part supported by what I called objected supported evidence , but not 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Your religious ideas so far never have seen any objected supported evidence : not even one single iota of it. All that supports them is subjective observations and feelings of belief.
And I never asked to provide 100% factual evidence for them. Just some objective supporting evidence for the existence of god and for god being the creator. And that in view of your claims that what you BELIEVE is the "one and only truth".
So why do you ask me for 100% factual evidence for my statements? The lack of support from your side is so far sufficient support that you have no objective supporting evidence for your beliefs at all !
:rolleyes:
[QUOTE]Personal insults are not allowed on this site Credo... you need to keep your emotions under control so we can have a civil adult debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
Again this i what you have chosen to believe despite the reality..Quote:
Your religious ideas so far never have seen any objected supported evidence : not even one single iota of it. All that supports them is subjective observations and feelings of belief.
the Objective evidence was given you but because of your zealous BELIEFS you choose to acknowledge the evidence.Quote:
And I never asked to provide 100% factual evidence for them. Just some objective supporting evidence for the existence of god and for god being the creator. And that in view of your claims that what you BELIEVE is the "one and only truth".
Because you are denying that your claims are BELIEFS and yet you admit the fact that the claims are not factual. :confused:Quote:
So why do you ask me for 100% factual evidence for my statements?
That may be true. How "Christian" are you to try to force people into that attitude with your nonsensical, illogical, unfair, ignorant, and intolerant posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Already before I told you that you have no idea of what OBJECTIVE means ! Look it up !Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
My statements are perfectly correct. I do not claim anything to be the "one and only truth".Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
I acknowledge the limitations of our knowledge. Where reality fades into subjective thinking.
Unlike a theist like you, who seems to think that if you yell loud and long enough - and be intolerant enough - you can force others to accept your own unsupported religious claims as correct. However take it from me : that does not work !
The only proper way a theist can support his/her subjective religious claims is by being an example of what he/she believes. Your attitude so far on this board has already made many questioning the principles and intentions of that what you are standing for.
:rolleyes:
Objective evidence- Information based on facts that can be proved through analysis, measurement, and observationQuote:
Already before I told you that you have no idea of what OBJECTIVE means ! Look it up !
Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective criticased on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal
Based on that definition I am yet to see any OBJECTIVE evidence from you. You have not provided anything observable or factual evidence for the Big Bang and yet you continue to claim there is objective factual evidence for it. No more theoretical babble please. If you want me stop calling your claims BELIEFS, please give me factual objective evidence.
Niether has anyone here... I believe the Bible is absolute Truth By Faith. You Believe the Big Bang is true By FAITH.Quote:
My statements are perfectly correct. I do not claim anything to be the "one and only truth".
Therefore you should understand that your beliefs in the big bang are based on Faith not obseverble objective evidence.Quote:
I acknowledge the limitations of our knowledge. Where reality fades into subjective thinking.
Nobody invited you to come on this religious forum, you came by your own will. So no one is forcing their beliefs on you.Quote:
Unlike a theist like you, who seems to think that if you yell loud and long enough - and be intolerant enough - you can force others to accept your own unsupported religious claims as correct. However take it from me : that does not work !
You on the other hand, are the one who claims to be non religious and yet you are on a religious forum day in and day out trying to force & shove your beliefs down religious people's throats. Why don't you spend more time on non religious subjects like politics parenting yardwork or something? We theists are not interested in your Athiestic views and beliefs, so please just stop trying to convert us to your faith. We are NOT interested. Sorry
Again if our Beliefs here offend you, please just end your frustration by unsubscribing from the religious forum.Quote:
The only proper way a theist can support his/her subjective religious claims is by being an example of what he/she believes. Your attitude so far on this board has already made many questioning the principles and intentions of that what you are standing for.
There is amply objective supporting evidence available on the Internet and in thousands of books, peer reports, and other publications that confirm the universe being increasingly expanding. Reversing that "film" leads to the valid conclusion that the entire universe originated from one single point, about 14.3 Billion years ago. (The earliest moments of that process of expansion is popular called the "Big Bang").Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
There are also many other scientific findings that support that same conclusion.
What we do not know is why that point expanded into what we call today "the universe".
That you do not accept the theory is your problem. That you just keep believing in God is just fine with me. Just do not claim it is the "one and only truth", and that it has any influence on - or consequence for - my life, unless you can prove that with objective supported evidence !
As I warned you before : I refuse to react to all parts of your frequently much-too-long reactions full with unsupported babble and wild claims.
Note that the argument has never been the origin of the Big Bang or Evolution. You started that.
The real argument against "creation" has always been the validity of the essence of your religious claim : that there exists a deity called "God", and that this "God" deity is the "Creator".
Never ever has even the smallest iota of objective supported evidence for that wild claim been provided. I challenge you to provide that. I say you can not do so !
And that is why you have to attack views that are in opposition of your religious claims.
Because you seem to be afraid that they challenge all that you believe in.
:D
·
[And there is also just as much objective supported evidence (available on line and in thousands of books) against the theory, so what? The bottom line is, it is not a FACT period and you believe it anyway. Which means you have faith in the theory.Quote:
QUOTE=Credendovidis]There is amply objective supporting evidence available on the Internet and in thousands of books, peer reports, and other publications that confirm the universe being increasingly expanding. Reversing that "film" leads to the valid conclusion that the entire universe originated from one single point, about 14.3 Billion years ago. (The earliest moments of that process of expansion is popular called the "Big Bang").
There are also many other scientific findings that support that same conclusion.
What we do not know is why that point expanded into what we call today "the universe".
Why are you trying to convince me to have the same belief you do?. lol You believe in Evo and the Big Bang, I Believe in Creation... so what? We do not have to believe in the same things. So stop trying to convince me that my beliefs are wrong and that yours are right because there is no proof of that wild claim. :rolleyes:Quote:
That you do not accept the theory is your problem(?? :confused:) That you just keep believing in God is just fine with me. Just do not claim it is the "one and only truth", and that it has any influence on - or consequence for - my life, unless you can prove that with objective supported evidence !
There is loads of OBJECTIVE supported evidence that the "Big Bang" happened, about 14.3 Billion years ago. That we do not know why it happened and have only partly an explanation how it happened has little influence on that it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
I am not trying to convince you at all. The difference between both Evolution and The "Big Bang" against the religious claim of Creation is that Evolution and The "Big Bang" are supported by OBJECTIVE supported evidence (i.e. both are real), against only subjective support for Creation, i.e. Creation is only supported by belief and nothing else.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
Believe whatever you like to believe, just do not claim it to be the "truth", unless you can provide objective supported evidence for that !
:rolleyes:
·
So I am just curious... CRED.. since your name means "I believe it as soon as I see it".. how do you believe in love... or being loved.. since you can't see it or can't prove it.. does that mean it doesn't exist??
And if you don't think it exists, that doesn't make it true, it just makes it YOUR PERCEPTION of what YOU THINK is true..
You argue semantics about what has been proven by OBJECTIVE supportive evidence... yet we don't fully understandn NOR CAN WE PROVE 100%
How this universe really came to be in existence.. SO how you can you believe what you don't even have the facts or the evidence to prove its origination of our existence or the universe itself? IT is your belief based on your own faith in the evidence you have been given, nothing has been proven ,otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE..
\Quote:
Originally Posted by shatteredsoul
Lol... I agree with you. Credo is a self contraction in himself. I think he just a little confused about his beliefs and ideals. :D
[QUOTE]Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
FYI that 14.3 billion date is nothing but a wild guess.. lol there is no way to prove it. But you believe it anyway so you have faith. in the unknown... So much for your name... :rolleyes:
There is no conclusive irrefutable evidence for niether so stop trying to shove your beliefs down everyone's throat by trying to claim your beliefs are true and have evidence. In reality it is just a thoery that you happen to invest a lot of FAITH in... :rolleyes:Quote:
I am not trying to convince you at all. The difference between both Evolution and The "Big Bang" against the religious claim of Creation is that Evolution and The "Big Bang" are supported by OBJECTIVE supported evidence (i.e. both are real), against only subjective support for Creation, i.e. Creation is only supported by belief and nothing else.
Believe whatever you like to believe, just do not claim it to be the "truth", unless you can provide objective supported evidence for that !
I stated ABOUT 14.3 Billion. Not 14.3 Billion.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
As far as scientific dating technology is concerned : it may not be 100% precise, but it's a lot more accurate than the dating technique used by your buddies of the "Creation Research Institute" and/or "A-in-G" with their approx. 6300 years - a number that is frankly totally ludicrous !
:D :D :D :D :D
·
[QUOTE]Lol.. But what you don't know is that the earth was dated at 70 million years to begin with then I was changed to billions convieniently to make evolution feasible. The earth could be 500 trillion years old or 6000 years old.. NO ONE KNOWS and there is no way to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
The reason carbon dating comes up with the billion year dates is because they first ASSUME it is in the Billions as a premise, but they have no way of proving it. Pure Guess work. That all you can do :)
Quote:
As far as scientific dating technology is concerned : it may not be 100% precise, but it's a lot more accurate than the dating technique used by your buddies of the "Creation Research Institute" and/or "A-in-G" with their approx. 6300 years - a number that is frankly totally ludicrous !
I frankly think the earth is 5 thousand Trillion years... lol That's my guess and it is as good as the scientists' guess.. :D
If the Atheist would spend as much time in Bible study as he spends in argument, he could then write a book disproving the Bible. Be aware, though. Several have set out to do so and have become convinced that the Bible really is true! Voltaire tried, Ingersoll tried, Lew Wallace tried. Are you smarter than they were?
Yes even lee Stroble was a zealous athiestic journalist who set out to dispove the Bible and yet now he is a Strong Christian who travels around the world preaching the Good News! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Galveston1
[QUOTE=sassyT]SassyT,Quote:
The reason carbon dating comes up with the billion year dates is because they first ASSUME it is in the Billions as a premise, but they have no way of proving it. Pure Guess work. That all you can do :)
:D
This right here proves you know nothing about science and why you think it's all mumbo jumbo. Maybe if you spent as much time learning, as you do arguing. You would learn why scientist think what they do.
FYI carbon dating only goes back 40k to 65k years. You can't carbon date anything older than that.
The essence of science is checking and - where and when necessary - updating the data to the latest available supporting data.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
With Christianity trying to keep a lid on science for many hundreds of years, it is no wonder that time dating had to be corrected several times, each time getting more precise...
That stated : Christian fanatics still believe in their approx. 6.300 years...
Not correct. We know 100% sure that the Christian fanatics' claim of 6.300 years is totally ludicrous.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
I have told you before : carbon dating can not exceed a short hundred thousand years. Above that other dating techniques take over. Up to Billions of years. Accurate dating with a margin of several percentage points.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
You should know that, as you claimed to have a scientific degree in biology. Not that your words and your way of thinking confirm that claim... Where and when did you say you got your degree?
Aaaahhh : so your approx. 6.300 years are just like the Genesis days... I see !Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
sassyT : just as all other little girls you should not play with big words which you clearly do not understand. Each reply you post further supports the idea that you have no idea what you are talking about...
:rolleyes:
·
Originally Posted by sassyT
I frankly think the earth is 5 thousand Trillion years... lol That's my guess and it is as good as the scientists' guess
Originally posted by Cred0
Aaaahhh : so your approx. 6.300 years are just like the Genesis days... I see !
?? She stated "I frankly think the earth is 5 thousand Trillion years so how is it just like the 6.300 years like Genesis?
I know I am not good at math BUT
Many people believe in the gap theory and that is what I believe basically.
If you spend more attention to what is posted on the discussion boards than on babbling here, you would know that sassyT as creationist claims that the earth is approx. 6.300 years old.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
:rolleyes:
·
Oh gee where is my babbling on this post?
Gee where did I came up with her saying "I frankly think the earth is 5 thousand Trillion years"
You proved my point, Linda !Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
:rolleyes:
·
Haha
kt123456's original question was :
"The story of creation (gen 1-2:4). what does the passage mean to its original viewers?"
===
I assume kt meant the original writer of that Bible book, and not those who are visiting this website...
Genesis 1:1 - 2:4
1-1 : In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, 2the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters.
3Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
6And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so. 8God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.
9And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11Then God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed, and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.” And it was so. 12The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good. 13And there was evening and there was morning, the third day.
14And God said, “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth, 18to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day.
20And God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.” 21So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm, and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 22God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day.
24And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind: cattle and creeping things and wild animals of the earth of every kind.” And it was so. 25God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good.
26Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” 27So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them. 28God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”
29God said, “See, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food. 30And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.
31God saw everything that he had made, and indeed, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
2-1 : Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all their multitude. 2And on the seventh day God finished the work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done. 3So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work that he had done in creation.
4These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
All what can be said about that meaning is that it most probably was intended as an explanation (anno approx. -2000) of the origin of everything by a person who had not been trained at any university (!) in astronomy nor cosmology nor biology.
But as Christians claim that the writer was guided by "God", it seems to indicate that - in the light of today's scientific knowledge - either "God's" guidance was not functioning very well, or that "God" neither had any idea how it all happened...
:rolleyes:
·
As a creationaist, I have said repeatedly that the Bible makes absolutely NO statement that requires us to believe that Earth is 6300 years old, or ANY certain length of time in age. Some do teach the 6,000 years or so, but I challenge them to show scripture supporting it. The record simply says "In the beginning---" which can be as far back as you might desire. Atheists use this assumption to discredit the Bible, when all that is faulty is man's understanding of it.
Which part of the Bible don't you believe? The history, poetry, or prophecy?
I agree. The Bible does not specify that there was absolutely nothing before the 6 day creation that I can find. In fact BEFORE the six day creation Genesis states the earth was without form and void. Makes it sound like the 6 day creation was a sort of phase two.
6 day creation proves that what is stated within the 6 day creation would be 6300 years old
By dating the amount of years/generations according to the Bible but that does not prove the earth itself is only 6300 years old if there was a two phase creation.
That is why I believe the concept of the gap theory.
Your co-creationist sassyT claims the earth to be approx. 6300 years old. I did not do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galveston1
Science teaches me that the earth is approx. 4.300.000.000 years old.
All I did was reply to the original question by kt123456 :
"The story of creation (gen 1-2:4). what does the passage mean to its original viewers?"
:rolleyes:
·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galveston1
Lol.. I agree with you 100% the earth could be 500 trillion years old for all we know. NO ONE KNOWS. That's my guess. A scientist's GUESS is as good as mine. :D
Incorrect and misleading !Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
1 - You previously have stated that you agree with the young earth creationists claim of 6300 years.
2 - The earth can not be 500 Trillion years old, as our universe is at max. 14.5 Billion years old.
3 - The age of the earth - based on scientific data and objective supported evidence - is approx. 4,3 Billion years.
.....It's not a scientist's guess.
4 - No your guess is not as good as the age mentioned under point 3.
:rolleyes:
·
You BELIEVE the universe is 14.5 billion years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Credendovidis
I believe it is 5000 Trillion years old or more.
Your guess is a good as mine.. ;)
No your guess isn't as good as someone who has evidence. That's like saying is the sky green? Your guess is as good as mine. Your guess from inside your church isn't as good as the one of the guy standing in the field looking at the sky.
1 - I ALWAYS state APPROX. 14,3 Billion years. And I do not BELIEVE that.Quote:
Originally Posted by sassyT
2 - That period is objectively supported by scientific measurements, freely available in the public domain.
3 - So far you have NEVER provided a single good reason why that 14,3 Billion years is incorrect.
4 - The 5000 Trillion years period you mention is totally ludicrous, and is not supported at all.
5 - Of course you may believe that, but your suggestion - like so many of your suggestions - lacks any validity.
As always your approach shows your lack of any scientific understanding, reason once more for me to ask you where and when you got the degree you claim to have received in Biology.
:D :D :D :D :D
·
What evidence?. lol It is not the same as saying the sky is green because the sky being blue is an irrefutable verifiable FACT. Radio dating however employs at least 5 assuptions that can not be verified as true.Quote:
Originally Posted by michealb
So I could also come up with my own dating model and give "evidence" for my 500 trillion theory using my own unverifiable ASSUMPTIONS.
If you really think that way, why don't you write a paper about it and when your paper gets published use it to laugh at the scientific community. You're a college student you should have the knowledge of how to get a paper published. I would actually applaud your efforts if you got the paper published because that would show that we have a serious flaw in way we conduct science.
However, if you actually studied something Sassy you would know that there is more evidence for the date of the universe that what you call "radio dating". You would rather argue out of ignorance though. The big bang isn't an easy idea to wrap your head around.
Here is a good place to start to get why we think the big bang is currently the best model for the formation of our universe
Frequently Asked Questions in Cosmology
I know you won't read it because it's the work of the devil but maybe someone who is on the fence and thinks you have good points will read it and realise that you don't.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:36 AM. |