• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Big blunder by the Institute for Creation Research

dyanaprajna2011

Dharmapala
Faith is a dangerous thing when not tempered and tested by logic and reason. If it's not, you get things like radical Islam, Waco, Jonesboro, and Christian science members refusing to be treated by doctors.
 

outhouse

Atheistically

yes I did, when confronted with facts you pull out the faith card.



Let me ask you a serious Question, If we showed you fact on the subject showing there was no flood would you change your belief?????????????????????????????????????????????????
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
Dont you think its dangerous to hold beliefs you have been shown to be false with logic, reason and knowledge??? You then are in a debate section and trying to say, you believe 2 + 1 = 7 no matte how many times we show you the answer is 3
Nobody has shown my beliefs to be false to my satisfaction.
 

Photonic

Ad astra!
Nobody has shown my beliefs to be false to my satisfaction.

And you haven't examined the fact that you may be holding your beliefs irrationally?

As a scientist I question my beliefs on a daily basis.

The ones that don't stand, I try to discard.
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
yes I did, when confronted with facts you pull out the faith card.



Let me ask you a serious Question, If we showed you fact on the subject showing there was no flood would you change your belief?????????????????????????????????????????????????
Nope. With origins science 'facts' come and go with every new breeze.
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
And you haven't examined the fact that you may be holding your beliefs irrationally?

As a scientist I question my beliefs on a daily basis.

The ones that don't stand, I try to discard.
I've examined my beliefs, while you may find them irrational, I find them wonderful and true.
 

dyanaprajna2011

Dharmapala
I've examined my beliefs, while you may find them irrational, I find them wonderful and true.

That's all well and good. But this is a website to debate religious topics. If you're not going to debate, and just keep preaching, it will be unfruitful, and not what this site was designed for.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Nope. With origins science 'facts' come and go with every new breeze.


So are you saying no matter what evidence we show, no matter how positive and known it is you wil not accept anything?????


by the way, 4200 years ago is not origin science at all its VERY WELL KNOWN HISTORY due to a little thing called writing
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
That's all well and good. But this is a website to debate religious topics. If you're not going to debate, and just keep preaching, it will be unfruitful, and not what this site was designed for.
Mostly I just keep answering posts like this one.

So are you saying no matter what evidence we show, no matter how positive and known it is you wil not accept anything?????
No.


by the way, 4200 years ago is not origin science at all its VERY WELL KNOWN HISTORY due to a little thing called writing
I'm not dogmatic about 4200 years, but I do believe the Deluge occurred roughly in that time frame. I've studied some world history, I don't really find any major problems with it and the Bible.

isnt that because you flat refuse to learn or even look at information that might appose your faith????
No, I actually have looked at much of that on my own. While I am not a big debater and I'm not an expert in the field of origins or history, I do study and try to find the truth. There are other subjects I also do this with and I have found that time constrains me greatly and sorting through tons of information and misinformation and EVERYONE has biases, and attempting to verify which is true is a huge endeavor that I prefer to do on my own time. We all still have a whole lot to learn on origins and I enjoy trying to learn. I don't enjoy arguing so much, which is why I prefer for the most part to simply share my faith and beliefs more than trying to prove mine or disprove others. And when people paste a huge post and say they've proven their position, I'm usually just happy for them that they've satisfied their own truths. Maybe someone will come along that likes to get into origins science debates with you all. I'm still learning what everyone else believes about it, but mostly people just get mad and so its all pretty fruitless. Ok, rambled on enough. Thanks.
 

Photonic

Ad astra!
Mostly I just keep answering posts like this one.

No.


I'm not dogmatic about 4200 years, but I do believe the Deluge occurred roughly in that time frame. I've studied some world history, I don't really find any major problems with it and the Bible.

No, I actually have looked at much of that on my own. While I am not a big debater and I'm not an expert in the field of origins or history, I do study and try to find the truth. There are other subjects I also do this with and I have found that time constrains me greatly and sorting through tons of information and misinformation and EVERYONE has biases, and attempting to verify which is true is a huge endeavor that I prefer to do on my own time. We all still have a whole lot to learn on origins and I enjoy trying to learn. I don't enjoy arguing so much, which is why I prefer for the most part to simply share my faith and beliefs more than trying to prove mine or disprove others. And when people paste a huge post and say they've proven their position, I'm usually just happy for them that they've satisfied their own truths. Maybe someone will come along that likes to get into origins science debates with you all. I'm still learning what everyone else believes about it, but mostly people just get mad and so its all pretty fruitless. Ok, rambled on enough. Thanks.

Some things that have been shown to you aren't beliefs, but simple facts. Why did you deny those?
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
Some things that have been shown to you aren't beliefs, but simple facts. Why did you deny those?
What some consider 'fact', I consider fiction. When someone says the earth is so many billions of years old (the number changes a lot), I tend to question their 'findings'. Now you may be quite convinced, but I am not. I am happy for those who believe they have found the facts to back their position, please pardon me for having my own thoughts about those same 'facts'.
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
javajo said:
I don't enjoy arguing so much, which is why I prefer for the most part to simply share my faith and beliefs more than trying to prove mine or disprove others.

How can that help resolve science debates at a science forum? Skeptic debators have already heard many religious testimonies from the followers of various religions, and many skeptics were former Christians. Preaching is simply not of any interest to most skeptics at science forums. Religion is not a part of the scientific research method. When geologists conduct research on the global flood, the vast majority of them do not start out by first consulting a religious book, and then try to make science agree with the religious book. That would be using science merely as a convenience when it agreed with a religious book, which would be intellectually dishonest, and would make a mockery out of science.
 
Last edited:

outhouse

Atheistically
I do believe the Deluge occurred roughly in that time frame.

Yet there is ZERO evidence that supports that belief. While there is a mountain of evidence that it did not happen at that time OR ever.



No, I actually have looked at much of that on my own.

No you havnt

there is no way you could have and still hold your belief. Looking at biased websites ran by theist do not count as anything credible.



and I'm not an expert in the field of origins or history

4200 years ago is not the origin of history




sorting through tons of information and misinformation and EVERYONE has biases

No they dont

NOT in this field.


This is strictly a theistic minority viewpoint, nothing more.


there is not a scientific debate about this AT ALL.





and attempting to verify which is true is a huge endeavor that I prefer to do on my own time


its not a huge endeavor to know the world is billions of years old and that homo spaiens are 200,000 years old and that a mythical flood story never happened as written EVER.


We all still have a whole lot to learn on origins and I enjoy trying to learn

lets get this straight right now

YOU have alot to learn on origins

WE actually know alot on homo sapiens and their origins. There is more to be learned but we are not in the dark on this at all.

4200 is not origins of anything with mankind.




And when people paste a huge post and say they've proven their position, I'm usually just happy for them that they've satisfied their own truths

thats a problem, its not their own truths. ITS COMMON KNOWLEDGE and we are trying to break the brainwashing to stop people from putting myths before reality.









Maybe someone will come along that likes to get into origins science debates with you all.


4200 years ago is not ORIGINS end of story and it is you participating in a debate thread.






I'm still learning what everyone else believes about it

its not believes, its knows.

big difference there.




but mostly people just get mad and so its all pretty fruitless

well when one is presented with facts and someone takes said person by the hand and shows facts regarding the issue and said person refuses to drink the knowledge in the glass before him or her, it does get frustrating.

To say its fruitless to me is severe ignorance. there are people on the fence that read these post and the knowledge does sink in to those with a open mind.


 

outhouse

Atheistically
No, I actually have looked at much of that on my own.

You didnt look at all.


Or you would be able to answer why there is no break in any civilization around 4200 years ago due to a global flood.

AND there is no flood debris or sediment in many parts of the world including the levant, NONE at all.



Instead you discount all of

science
geology
anthropology
history
written history
cultural history


even the pope wont follow your belief
 

Photonic

Ad astra!
What some consider 'fact', I consider fiction. When someone says the earth is so many billions of years old (the number changes a lot), I tend to question their 'findings'. Now you may be quite convinced, but I am not. I am happy for those who believe they have found the facts to back their position, please pardon me for having my own thoughts about those same 'facts'.

I don't "consider" anything a fact. It is or isn't.

1 or 0. It's a binary system for me.
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
There is some, though its not conclusive.

Then please present it then. All so-called "evidence" I've seen doesn't pan out.

There are pictures taken by pilots and satelites and locals tell stories of what could be the Ark on the Mountains of Ararat. Turkey is not too cooperative.

This is an appeal to speculation. Over the past few decades there have been numerous claims of the supposed "Ark" being found at multiple cites.


Also, the Lord Jesus Christ spoke of Noah and his days as well as did Peter.

Irrelevant. Jesus and Peter were privy to these stories as they were passed down orally, recorded on scrolls and read at temple. It doesn't mean they were true.

Depends on who you ask.

Actually it doesn't. Geology does not side with a global flood in the time line laid out as the bible describes.

Or vice-versa.

Nope. The Sumerian culture predates the Hebrews.

I agree, except when we are piecing together history as it contains references to real kings and kingdoms and events in history.

Actually what you have to do it use extrabiblical sources to substantiate the claims made by the bible. There are some instances where extrabiblical (standard) history can be corroborated by the bible but it's never the (go to) source when it comes to history.

While it does contain some scientifically accurate statements and medical practices the world did not adapt until the 1800's (like surgeons washing their hands between patients

And this is why I say you should not be using the bible as a history book. The Egyptians have carved inscriptions dealing with this

such as the earth is round, Isaiah 40:22, it is suspended on nothing

It's describing a flat round earth (compass). It's not describing a round or oval like object (ball).

hydrologic cycle

I'm not sure how much you really know about history. The Hebrews were not the first or only culture that understood the hydrologic cycle. Once again, the Summerians understood this and they weren't the only cultures that did. The Hebrews can hardly be aknowledge as the pioneers for this knowledge.

I just don't have the time to address the other claims you made since history shows you to be incorrect. I mean..."water currents"...really? Hebrews were hardly the pioneers of that knowledge as well.
 

javajo

Well-Known Member
Sorry, there are just too many of you to be able to give an adequate response. I respect everyone's beliefs and I'll leave you to them. I wish you all well.
 

Agnostic75

Well-Known Member
javajo said:
Sorry, there are just too many of you to be able to give an adequate response.

No problem. Creationist scientists are outnumbered too in the scientific community, since about about 99.86% of experts accept naturalistic or theistic evolution.

Even if you were at a predominantly Christian website, your scientific arguments would still not be valid. So, it is not so much a question of how many opponents you have, but how good your arguments are. Galileo had many opponents, but his arguments eventually won since they were good arguments.
 
Last edited:
Top