Evolution My ToE

[Dan From Smithville]

Is this what you meant?
If you’re speaking about “parallel universe” entities, I could still associate that with spirit life.
Interesting how many people conjecture regarding other dimensions....wonder where that comes from? Any scientific basis?

I have no real basis. It is simply an example of an explanation that has the same weight as ghosts or demons as explanations.

As a reminder, I am waiting to see how you tie all these disparate points together to show that creationism is not anti-intellectual.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Is this what you meant?
If you’re speaking about “parallel universe” entities, I could still associate that with spirit life.
Interesting how many people conjecture regarding other dimensions....wonder where that comes from? Any scientific basis?

I see no reason that visitors from another dimension would have to be spirits or demons. Is there some reason you would not consider the possibility of living visitors? What would lead you to such a conclusion?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Some people will believe anything, as long as it agrees with their preconceived notions. I remember the days of the supermarket tabloids and how some people believed them using the line "if it wasn't true they couldn't print it". Meanwhile ignoring the real journalism in nearby papers that regularly refuted it. Hmmm, dad as a blue haired old lady. I can picture that.

If people are expecting rational answers from that source, they should look elsewhere. Right now the irrationality seems to be focused on the speculation of a pseudoscience into existence, based on a bizarre hybrid of evolution and Genesis. Very confused speculation.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

For example some of the people and places mentioned are known to have existed, but others are not.

Are not, what? Known about...yet? Or, are known not to have existed?

It’s real hard to prove a negative.

Pontius Pilate was thought to have been fictitious, at one time.

So, too, with King David.

The same with Hezekiah’s tunnel.

Until the evidence they discovered proved these people and places existed.

The Bible is always put down first. (You don’t notice that?)
But archaeology, more often than not, vindicates it.
When it doesn’t, either the researchers are looking in the wrong place & therefore haven’t found it, or the evidence found is misinterpreted.

And, heaven forbid, no evidence of a Biblical account describing a miracle can ever be interpreted in support of such! The entire scientific establishment and their materialistic POV’s would have to be readjusted and retooled. The current system would crumble.

So when it can’t be explained to suit naturalism? Many times, it’s “we don’t know.” That happens a lot in geology!

 

[Subduction Zone]

One can tell a lot from the writings they produce. We also know Paul was embraced by the early apostles which seals his authority of being from God, and that His testimony was true.

How do we know that? I know Paul made claims, but those don't count.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Are not, what? Known about...yet? Or, are known not to have existed?

It real hard to prove a negative.

Pontius Pilate was thought to have been fictitious, at one time.

So, too, with King David.

The same with Hezekiah’s tunnel.

Until the evidence they discovered proved they existed.

The Bible is always put down first. (You don’t notice that?)
But archaeology, more often than not, vindicates it.
When it doesn’t, either the researchers are looking in the wrong place & therefore haven’t found it, or the evidence found is misinterpreted.

And, heaven forbid, no evidence of a Biblical account describing a miracle can ever be interpreted in support of such! The entire scientific establishment and their materialistic POV’s would have to be readjusted and retooled. The current system would crumble.

So when it can’t be explained to suit naturalism? Many times, it’s “we don’t know.” That happens a lot in geology!

You are dodging. I was hoping we could avoid that and other common creationist tactics. I did not ask you to demonstrate people or places in the Bible existed. Please!

You claim the literal interpretation of the Bible. I have merely pointed to one item that calls such an interpretation into question. If the existence of some people, I'll add events as well, and places cannot be verified, then how can it be demanded that it should be seen as literal. You do, so it should be a simple question to answer.

So far, I get that you picked a religion. By all appearances that choice is on faith alone. In my opinion that is all that is required. You are claiming more, but not producing that more. That is the substantial basis of my questions.

You still need to tie all this together to demonstrate that creationism is pro-intellectual.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Are not, what? Known about...yet? Or, are known not to have existed?

It real hard to prove a negative.

Pontius Pilate was thought to have been fictitious, at one time.

So, too, with King David.

The same with Hezekiah’s tunnel.

Until the evidence they discovered proved they existed.

The Bible is always put down first. (You don’t notice that?)
But archaeology, more often than not, vindicates it.
When it doesn’t, either the researchers are looking in the wrong place & therefore haven’t found it, or the evidence found is misinterpreted.

And, heaven forbid, no evidence of a Biblical account describing a miracle can ever be interpreted in support of such! The entire scientific establishment and their materialistic POV’s would have to be readjusted and retooled. The current system would crumble.

So when it can’t be explained to suit naturalism? Many times, it’s “we don’t know.” That happens a lot in geology!

You do claim to know. I am asking how? Not for your conjecture.

 

[nPeace]

Correct. God never said anything. You are conflating the Bible with God again.

And Genesis is a book of myths.

Aside from what people claim, the evidence does not support your claim.
On what basis do you make this claim?

 

[Polymath257]

Pontius Pilate was thought to have been fictitious, at one time.

So, too, with King David.

The same with Hezekiah’s tunnel.

Until the evidence they discovered proved they existed.

And so was Troy. But the discovery of Troy doesn't show that Athena the goddess existed or that the Iliad is valid history.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Aside from what people claim, the evidence does not support your claim.
On what basis do you make this claim?

Actually it does support my claim. At best the Bible claims that God said something. No part of the Bible is thought to have been written by him. It was written by people.

And of course we all know that Genesis is a book of myths. At least anyone with almost any degree of scientific literacy.

 

[Subduction Zone]

And so was Troy. But the discovery of Troy doesn't show that Athena the goddess existed or that the Iliad is valid history.

How about this:

 

[nPeace]

i don't "claim" that the Bible is wrong. I can and have shown it to be wrong. And the Bible's prophecies tend to fail.

Some reading material for dad:

Biblical prophecies - RationalWiki

Can I take you up on this?
The author of this article seems dishonest.
I looked at the first claim, and there is no truth to it.
Let me know if you are interested, in looking at these erroneous claims.

 

[nPeace]

Actually it does support my claim. At best the Bible claims that God said something. No part of the Bible is thought to have been written by him. It was written by people.

Of course it was written by people. I don't know of anyone who denies that.
However, the writers claim to be inspired by God, and looking at the evidence, it does evidently confirm that claim.

And of course we all know that Genesis is a book of myths. At least anyone with almost any degree of scientific literacy.

That's what you claim. I was hoping you would support that claim - not by repeating the claim (which does nothing), but by providing some sort of evidence that would support it.

The evidence I presented, shows that it does not fit the category of myth.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I see no reason that visitors from another dimension would have to be spirits or demons. Is there some reason you would not consider the possibility of living visitors? What would lead you to such a conclusion?

Are you willing to consider, that they are invisible lifeforms? Or just by artificial means, like Data in the ST film “Insurrection “? (Remember, they couldn’t pass through matter.)

If someone claims that they have spoken with God and He has given them the correct interpretation of scripture, how am I to know this? What screens them from those have not spoken to Him or only think they have and made the same claims? Lots of different interpretations by different religions have all been touted as directly communicated by God. That cannot be possible. So how do you know which is correct in a way that you can demonstrate to anyone and they can see it too?

“Talk” to God? According to Luke 10:21, it would not require a conversation; just enlightenment and revelation.

But to answer your question: John 13:35.

Especially when refusing to kill others goes against the authorities telling you to do so! The organization promoting such a neutral stand, would easily get noticed!

Usually, t’s not hard to obey God’s laws (1 John 5:3). I say “usually”, because living in this world can make it difficult at times.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Are you willing to consider, that they are invisible lifeforms? Or just by artificial means, like Data in the ST film “Insurrection “? (Remember, they could pass through matter.)


“Talk” to God? According to Luke 10:21, it would not require a conversation; just enlightenment and revelation.

But to answer your question: John 13:35.

Especially when refusing to kill others goes against the authorities telling you to do so! The organization promoting such a neutral stand, would easily get noticed!

Usually, t’s not hard to obey God’s laws (1 John 5:3). I say “usually”, because living in this world can make it difficult at times.

I have nothing but unverified accounts to go by. It is difficult to consider them anything from that. One consideration is as plausible to the next under those circumstances.

Ability to pass through matter is not an established property. Recall that there are no established properties of the phenomenon we are calling ghosts. There are only claimed properties. They could be transporting away on one side of a solid object and reintegrating on the other. Perhaps they are just images and some matter interferes with the signal. Since nothing is established, they can literally be anything and do anything. Concluding on them is meaningless given what is known.

Your answers require assumptions that you have not established as fact. Yes, you believe them, but that does not make them real or factual. Faith does not require the rational, but your claim that creationism is not anti-intellectual does and continues to remain unsupported.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Of course it was written by people. I don't know of anyone who denies that.
However, the writers claim to be inspired by God, and looking at the evidence, it does evidently confirm that claim.

What evidence? There is no such evidence. Everything would be much simpler if evidence existed.

Some writers may claim that, but not all did.

That's what you claim. I was hoping you would support that claim - not by repeating the claim (which does nothing), but by providing some sort of evidence that would support it.

Funny. This is exactly what you do. Along with meandering and incomprehensible Gish Galloping.

The evidence I presented, shows that it does not fit the category of myth.

No. It does not.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How about this:

Brad Pitt is from Missouri, but I am not sure if that is something I want to brag about.

 

[YoursTrue]

So you have first hand knowledge with Paul to make that certain claim. How often to you talk to Paul? Daily?
If Jesus is the actual son of GOD and Mary then GOD must be male or be both male and female. So to your knowledge is god just male or is god part male and part female?

I would like to say something here. While the Bible speaks of God in the masculine sense, that is because of the type of language. But God is not human. Also, since God is spoken of as the Maker of the heavens and the earth, He can maneuver genes to accomplish His will. Again, while I don't know everything, I would like to ask you if you believe there is evil or sinful actions in this world.

 

[YoursTrue]

And so was Troy. But the discovery of Troy doesn't show that Athena the goddess existed or that the Iliad is valid history.

Interestingly enough, Paul spoke of other gods when he was in Athens. Acts chapter 17 describes his visit there. He also spoke of his God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, in contrast to the Greek gods. The temple for Athena was in Athens while Paul was there. Athens, the city in Greece, is named after the goddess Athena. Paul gave a talk on these things while he was there. (Acts chapter 17)

 

[YoursTrue]

Of course it was written by people. I don't know of anyone who denies that.
However, the writers claim to be inspired by God, and looking at the evidence, it does evidently confirm that claim.


That's what you claim. I was hoping you would support that claim - not by repeating the claim (which does nothing), but by providing some sort of evidence that would support it.

The evidence I presented, shows that it does not fit the category of myth.

Yes, good point, because the Bible explicitly describes encounters and actions and history.