The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

J C · 13-04-2013 09:33PM

Does everybody notice a pattern? ... I comprehensively answer each and every question I'm asked about both Creation and Evolution ... and everybody else on the thread asks me endless questions ... but they refuse to answer my question on the evidence for M2M Evolution ... something that is supposed to be so important that any school not teaching it without reservation will be closed by law!!!

Can I also say that Creation Scientists fully support the teaching of Natural Selection as a fact within science classes. We also acknowledge the genius of Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell in synthesising a comprehensive theory to explain how living organisms can adapt to their environment and to changes in their environment (using pre-existing genetic diversity).

We fully recognise and accept that Natural Selection and Sexual Selection play very important roles and can have very serious economic and health effects (Ab resistance and loss of genetic diversity being but two examples of health and economic effects). Indeed many Creationists are deeply involved in research that evaluates various very important effects of NS (within conventional science).

I would also say that M2M Evolution (as one of the great Paradigms of our times) should be taught as part of any liberal education worthy of the name ... but so should the findings of Creation Science and ID research ... within Comparative Religion Class, if that is deemed necessary.
Life is too short for all these arguments ... lets love one another ... respecting one another's ideas ... and benefiting from each other's constructive criticisms.

Brian Shanahan · 13-04-2013 11:07PM

tim3000 wrote: »

Hitler was Austrian I am afraid haha Godwins law in action again ha

Austria considers itself a German nation. Mainly because Austrians are Germans.

Brian Shanahan · 13-04-2013 11:16PM

doctoremma wrote: »

No they don't. There are lots of data to show that mammals coexisted with dinosaurs.

Mammals pre-existed dinosaurs, as science has shown. For fecks sake!

Brian Shanahan · 13-04-2013 11:20PM

J C wrote: »

Here is how the above NCSE article you linked to starts:-
"Suppose you picked up the newspaper tomorrow morning and were startled to see headlines announcing the discovery of a large ship high on the snowy slopes of Mt. Ararat in eastern Turkey. As you hurriedly scanned the article, you learned that a team from the Institute for Creation Research had unearthed the vessel and their measurements and studies had determined that it perfectly matched the description of Noah's Ark given in the book of Genesis. Would this be proof at last—the "smoking gun" as it were—that the earliest chapters of the Bible were true and that the story they told of a six-day creation and a universal flood was a sober, scientific account?

Perhaps surprisingly, the answer is no. Even this sensational find is not enough to validate a literal reading of Genesis. "

So you take an article which debunks a hoax as a hoax (and a one designed for the purpose of committing a fraud too!) at its starting point as 100% proof that we wouldn't accept actual proof of Noah's ark.

Re evidence:

J C · 13-04-2013 11:32PM

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

So you take an article which debunks a hoax as a hoax (and a one designed for the purpose of committing a fraud too!) at its starting point as 100% proof that we wouldn't accept actual proof of Noah's ark.

Re evidence:

What you are saying escapes me!!!:)

J C · 13-04-2013 11:38PM

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Mammals pre-existed dinosaurs, as science has shown. For fecks sake!

Now will ye believe me that the Triceratops was a mammal?:)

ManMade · 13-04-2013 11:40PM

Brian Shanahan · 13-04-2013 11:41PM

Geomy wrote: »

Did you hear about that moth that appeared on a volcanic island that's miles from anywhere,and too far from any mainland to fly to that Island...

I was told about it by some open minded scientist,he says this moth makes a mockery of Darwinism :S

Your "open minded scientist" probably claims to have proof that the world is flat, was created on Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC, and that in fact Hitler did not have any Jews killed, but was saving them from the British gas chambers.

doctoremma · 13-04-2013 11:41PM

J C wrote: »

Does everybody notice a pattern? ... I comprehensively answer each and every question I'm asked about both Creation and Evolution

No you don't. You don't answer anything. You post, that's true. But your posts are, at best, confused and, at worst, lies. It's like watching a dog chase its tail. It's pointless, both for the dog and for those watching.

And the dog doesn't even realise how stupid he looks; sure, he thinks it's great craic.

doctoremma · 13-04-2013 11:44PM

J C wrote: »

but so should the findings of Creation Science and ID research ... within Comparative Religion Class, if that is deemed necessary.

I have absolutely zero argument with that point of view. I imagine none of us do. Science for scientists, creationism for religionists.

I think that's thread closed?

J C · 13-04-2013 11:55PM

Enjoy!!!;)

ManMade · 14-04-2013 12:38AM

doctoremma wrote: »

I have absolutely zero argument with that point of view. I imagine none of us do. Science for scientists, creationism for religionists.

I think that's thread closed?

As long as this creation "science" is never taught (in schools like JC wants) as a viable alternative to evolution/big bang/fossils and actual science then yes creationism has a viable place in siociety; a church.

coolhull · 14-04-2013 12:51AM

You know, J C, I think there is a lot to be admired about you.
You remind me of an old fighter, who gets knocked many times to the floor, yet gets up and keeps coming back for more. But often it's just pride that keeps him going. He knows that he has been comprehensively trashed, but can't admit it, even to himself.
And it can't have escaped your attention that you're virtually the only one on this thread taking an opposing view to the e rest of us.
They say the world don't move to the beat of just one drum, and the world does need its share of eccentrics.That's fine. You're at the stage now where you know you're beaten, but your pride won't let you stop.
But I think I detect that you yourself don't believe half the stuff you're posting here lately.

Geomy · 14-04-2013 03:21AM

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Your "open minded scientist" probably claims to have proof that the world is flat, was created on Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC, and that in fact Hitler did not have any Jews killed, but was saving them from the British gas chambers.

No he's a Buddhist

Geomy · 14-04-2013 03:22AM

coolhull wrote: »

You know, J C, I think there is a lot to be admired about you.
You remind me of an old fighter, who gets knocked many times to the floor, yet gets up and keeps coming back for more. But often it's just pride that keeps him going. He knows that he has been comprehensively trashed, but can't admit it, even to himself.
And it can't have escaped your attention that you're virtually the only one on this thread taking an opposing view to the e rest of us.
They say the world don't move to the beat of just one drum, and the world does need its share of eccentrics.That's fine. You're at the stage now where you know you're beaten, but your pride won't let you stop.
But I think I detect that you yourself don't believe half the stuff you're posting here lately.

JC is a legend on Boards

J C · 14-04-2013 03:55PM

ManMade wrote: »

As long as this creation "science" is never taught (in schools like JC wants) as a viable alternative to evolution/big bang/fossils and actual science then yes creationism has a viable place in siociety; a church.

Creation Science and M2M Evolution Science are both scientific investigations of 'origins' paradigms ... one with God and the other without God. They should both be taught in schools ... in Comparative Religion class.

J C · 14-04-2013 04:04PM

doctoremma wrote: »

No you don't. You don't answer anything. You post, that's true. But your posts are, at best, confused and, at worst, lies.

I clearly and honestly answer each and every question I'm asked about both Creation and Evolution ... and if I don't get around to every question ... or even make the slightest apparent error this will be continuously dragged up and thrown at me until I deal with it.

You guys haven't given us one piece of evidence in favour of M2M Evolution ... and yet ye want it to be taught as fact in science class ... and now have a law to force it to be taught as such.
I'm genuinely bemused at what ye want taught, to stay compliant with this new law in England.
The only fact that I know is that Abiogenesis and M2M Evolution are the Atheist 'origins' explantions for the origin and development of life on Earth ... and that sounds like it should be taught in religion rather than science class!!!

doctoremma wrote: »

It's like watching a dog chase its tail. It's pointless, both for the dog and for those watching.

And the dog doesn't even realise how stupid he looks; sure, he thinks it's great craic.

... ah, but this particular dog has the Evolutionist Fox by the tail ... having consumed the rest of it!!!!:D

J C · 14-04-2013 04:35PM

coolhull wrote: »

You know, J C, I think there is a lot to be admired about you.
You remind me of an old fighter, who gets knocked many times to the floor, yet gets up and keeps coming back for more. But often it's just pride that keeps him going. He knows that he has been comprehensively trashed, but can't admit it, even to himself.
And it can't have escaped your attention that you're virtually the only one on this thread taking an opposing view to the e rest of us.
They say the world don't move to the beat of just one drum, and the world does need its share of eccentrics. That's fine. You're at the stage now where you know you're beaten, but your pride won't let you stop.
But I think I detect that you yourself don't believe half the stuff you're posting here lately.

You're damning me with feint praise here!!!
I am not old ... and there is little to be admired about somebody 'flogging a dead horse', like you suggest I am.
However, this 'horse' is very much alive ... and winning ... with the rest of the field back at the starting gates on M2M Evolution !!!

I'm not a 'punch drunk' old man boxing his way to oblivion ... I'm buzzing like a Wasp ... and stinging like a Bee ... and as fresh as when I first entered the ring nearly 10 years ago!!:D

You do have a point about me being the only one vindicating the Bible on a Christianity Thread ... while I can understand that Young Earth Creationism isn't everybodies 'cup of tea', I can't explain why no Christian on the thread has ever come to my assistance in defense of even mainstream ideas, like having basic respect for Jesus Christ and His Word in the Bible ... the following quotes being but but two recent examples where nobody raised an eyebrow, except myself:-

ManMade wrote: »

Jesus said so..... A conman said so...
As an atheist..[Sarcasm] I am sold[/Sarcasm]
Jesus may have existed. His supernatural abilities are sorta questionable.

500.
http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Genesis%205.32

Jack and the beanstalk is more likely.

Edit:Just noticed he was older than 500 hundred when he had his children. Sweet Jesus his balls must've dragged a mile behind him :eek:

Indeed I also can't explain why hundereds of Atheists have enthusiastically contributed to this thread while only a few Christians have posted anything on it.

This thread has presented many unexpected 'eyeopeners' on the current situation with regard to both the Christian and Atheist religions.

J C · 14-04-2013 04:45PM

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Your "open minded scientist" probably claims to have proof that the world is flat, was created on Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC, and that in fact Hitler did not have any Jews killed, but was saving them from the British gas chambers.

I strongly object to your linking Holocaust Denial with Creationism. There is no such link.

Indeed many Creationists are Jews, with family members who died in the Holocaust - and I'd ask you to please withdraw your unfounded remark out of respect for the truth and these people.
The Hebrew Year (Currently 5773) is based on their estimate of the number of years since the Creation of Adam and Eve.

... and now that you have been told that the scientist is a Buddhist, you might consider withdrawing the entire post with an apology for your clear and unfounded bias !!!

Geomy wrote: »

No he's a Buddhist

ManMade · 14-04-2013 07:12PM

J C wrote: »

Creation Science and M2M Evolution Science are both scientific investigations of 'origins' paradigms ... one with God and the other without God. They should both be taught in schools ... in Comparative Religion class.

No creationism belongs in a church with the "virgin" birth not in a public school.

J C wrote: »

The Hebrew Year (Currently 5773) is based on their estimate of the number of years since the Creation of Adam and Eve.

How was this calculated? Please tell of this scientific feat swamped in proofs, and evidence.

J C · 14-04-2013 07:19PM

... and anybody visiting Holland should consider visiting the new full-scale Noah's Ark ...
... even if you're not a Creationist, it's an amazing achievement by one carpenter and four other people.

I intend to visit next time I'm in Europe ... its a lot easier than scaling Mt Ararat to see the real thing!!!:D

Contact Details.
Ark of Noah
Maasstraat 14
3313 CR Dordrecht
Netherlands

Email: info@arkvannoach.com

Phone: +31 (0) 78-6134535

The Ark is open from Monday to Saturday between 09:00 and 17:00.
http://www.arkvannoach.com/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/12/10/wrd-noahs-ark-replica-netherlands.html

J C · 14-04-2013 07:53PM

ManMade wrote: »

No creationism belongs in a church with the "virgin" birth not in a public school.

If that's going to be the case, then M2M Evolution and 'Spontaneous' Abiogenesis belongs at an Atheist Humanist Assembly ... and not in Public School either.
I'm a liberal myself in these matters - and I think that any liberal education worthy of the name, should include Comparative Religion ... and I think that the beliefs of M2M Evolutionism and Creationism as well as Intelligent Design should be taught in all schools.
It might also help students have more respect and tolerance for diversity (than has been shown on this thread towards Creationism) ... which is essential in our increasingly multi-cultural society.

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
The Hebrew Year (Currently 5773) is based on their estimate of the number of years since the Creation of Adam and Eve.

ManMade
How was this calculated? Please tell of this scientific feat swamped in proofs, and evidence.

I'm not a Jew ... you'll need to ask your local Rabbi.
... or if you don't know one, have a look here:-
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/holidays/About_Holidays/Types_of_Holidays/Fiveyearcalendar/CountingJewishYear.shtml

ManMade · 14-04-2013 08:02PM

J C wrote: »

If that's going to be the case, then M2M Evolution along with 'Spontaneous' Abiogenesis belongs to an Atheist Humanist Assembly[/B].

By that you mean an unbiased science lab then yes.

I'm not a Jew ... you'll need to ask your local Rabbi.
... or if you don't know one have a look here:-
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/holidays/About_Holidays/Types_of_Holidays/Fiveyearcalendar/CountingJewishYear.shtml

I'm asking how creationists determined the age of the universe. Please tell.

J C · 14-04-2013 08:27PM

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
If that's going to be the case, then M2M Evolution along with 'Spontaneous' Abiogenesis belongs to an Atheist Humanist Assembly.

ManMade
By that you mean an unbiased science lab then yes.

No, I mean a conference or assembly of Atheistic Humanists gathered together to discuss their common interest in Atheism and its underpinning doctrines (like Materialistic Microbes to Man Evolution) ... which, last time I checked, isn't the same thing as an unbiased science lab ... where people of all religions and none work together in an equal opportunities environment (on matters of operative science)!!

ManMade wrote: »

I'm asking how creationists determined the age of the universe. Please tell.

You asked me how the Jewish people determine the Hebrew year ... and I gave you a link ... go figure!!!

I've asked you what we are legally compelled to say about M2M Evolution in science classes in England ... (or voluntarily in Comparative Religion Classes elsewhere) ... and you have been very shy about telling us.

Zombrex · 15-04-2013 06:39PM

Geomy wrote: »

JC is a legend on Boards

That's one word for it ...

J C · 15-04-2013 08:52PM

Zombrex wrote: »

That's one word for it ...

That wouldn't be 'sour grapes' by any chance?:pac::D

ManMade · 15-04-2013 08:56PM

J C wrote: »

No, I mean a conference or assembly of Atheistic Humanists gathered together to discuss their common interest in Atheism and its underpinning doctrines (like Materialistic Microbes to Man Evolution) ... which, last time I checked, isn't the same thing as an unbiased science lab ... where people of all religions and none work together in an equal opportunities environment (on matters of operative science)!!

You asked me how the Jewish people determine the Hebrew year ... and I gave you a link ... go figure!!!

I've asked you what we are legally compelled to say about M2M Evolution in science classes in England ... (or voluntarily in Comparative Religion Classes elsewhere) ... and you have been very shy about telling us.

You don't seem to want to answer my question on how creationists determined the age of the universe/earth.

The science community overwhelming supports evolution as the best theory we have and so do the public.

Evolution should be taught in Ireland for this reason. If a better explanation is discovered then of course it evolution would be scrapped. I don't see that ever happening.

Teaching creationism as anything but a belief of a small minority of people and as a historic fairy tale that people believed before science got there would be state endorsement of god. Thankfully this isn't a Bible Belt state and removing god from schools is within sight and science teachers would laugh at concepts like Noah's ark and history teachers would be left very confused if told to teach it.

God should never and will never be mentioned in the science lab ever. Having a religion is optional. Hindus/ Buddists and atheists shouldn't have to accommodate Christian beliefs in a secular siociety, in the same way Christians don't accommodate Hindus beliefs. And the teaching of the abrahamic god impinges my right to freedom from religion and others right to freedom of religion.

It you believe evolution impinges your freedom of religion then maybe science isn't for you.

J C · 15-04-2013 10:23PM

ManMade wrote: »

You don't seem to want to answer my question on how creationists determined the age of the universe/earth.

... and you haven't provided any evidence for M2M Evolution, like I have asked.

ManMade wrote: »

The science community overwhelming supports evolution as the best theory we have and so do the public.

'Mammy likes it and daddy likes it too' ... is that the level of your evidence for Atheism and its pet theory, that Microbes became Man??!!!

Scientific Evolution in the sense of Natural Selection of existing expressed created genetic diversity is a fact ...
... but Religious Evolution in the sense of microbes evolving into mankind through selected mutation damage and replication mistakes is something that Atheists have constructed to bolster their need to deny God.

ManMade wrote: »

Evolution should be taught in Ireland for this reason. If a better explanation is discovered then of course it evolution would be scrapped. I don't see that ever happening.

Scientific ideas like Natural Selection of pre-existing genetic diversity should be taught in science class ...
... but the Atheistic and Theistic varieties of M2M Evolution should be taught in religion classes along with the evidence for Direct Creation.

ManMade wrote: »

Teaching creationism as anything but a belief of a small minority of people and as a historic fairy tale that people believed before science got there would be state endorsement of god. Thankfully this isn't a Bible Belt state and removing god from schools is within sight and science teachers would laugh at concepts like Noah's ark and history teachers would be left very confused if told to teach it.

... so the agenda is to remove God from Schools (and by extension society itself) ... and you say it is within sight in Ireland.
... a 'pipe dream' of Atheism, no doubt, with about as much chance of coming true as a fish becoming a fishmonger ... but then again, you believe that this can also happen ... if given enough time and mutagenesis!!!!

... and you say that the job of science teachers is to mock and laugh at the beliefs of Christian parents and children within their schools??? ... I think not!!!

Can I gently remind you (before you lose the run of yourself) that on the last census, over 90% of the Irish population declared themselves to be Theists... so you will need to do a little more than to proclaim that we are all Ape's coming from nothing and going nowhere, if you are to convince the people of Ireland to jettison the love of God and the bliss of an eternity in Heaven, for the bleak eternal hoplessness of Atheism.

ManMade wrote: »

God should never and will never be mentioned in the science lab ever.

That's just your God-denying militant Atheism showing ... I'll mention God wherever and whenever I'm challenged to defend Him.

As the Christian Creed says, God made everything both visible and invisible ... and if you want to deny God in the science lab then any Christian, worthy of the name, has the right to proclaim His existence there.

Matthew 10:32-33
King James Version (KJV)

32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven.

33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

Alternatively, lets agree to neither deny nor affirm God in the science lab ... like I have said, I'm a liberal in these matters, as long as equality of esteem is provided to both Theists and Atheists.

Spontaneous Microbes to Man Evolution is a profoudly and exclusively Atheistic concept that has no evidence for its validity ... and should be confined to gatherings of Atheists and other God-deniers ... as well as Comparative Religion Classes in school.

ManMade wrote: »

Having a religion is optional. Hindus/ Buddists and atheists shouldn't have to accommodate Christian beliefs in a secular siociety, in the same way Christians don't accommodate Hindus beliefs. And the teaching of the abrahamic god impinges my right to freedom from religion and others right to freedom of religion.

... if religion is to be banned from schools and science labs then so also should irreligion ... such as the basic dogmas of Atheism like Materialistic M2M Evolution.

ManMade wrote: »

If you believe evolution impinges your freedom of religion then maybe science isn't for you.

The legal forcing of the God-denying beliefs of Athesim into schools under the guise of science and the banning of God from there does destroy the freedom of religion of all Theist children and their parents and families ... who pay 90% of the taxes that fund these schools!!!:(

The Concrete Doctor · 15-04-2013 11:12PM

J C wrote: »

... and you haven't provided any evidence for M2M Evolution, like I have asked.

'Mammy likes it and daddy likes it too' ... is that the level of your evidence for Atheism and its pet theory, that Microbes became Man??!!!
(

There you go again, evidence! You have presented zero evidence for the truth of Genises and you keep on looking for others to provide you with evidence. Your basic thesis is flawed for one good reason, Genises is made up. Noah is fictitious, as are Adam and Eve, Cain and Able, the Garden of Eden. The whole lot is nicely written but with no basis in fact. None of it really happened. The Dutch boat is as real as ET or Star Wars. To even offer the slightest suggestion that it proves the Ark was real seriously deminishes your credibility.

Maybe though, you can prove otherwise.

J C · 15-04-2013 11:22PM

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

There you go again, evidence! You have presented zero evidence for the truth of Genises and you keep on looking for others to provide you with evidence. Your basic thesis is flawed for one good reason, Genises is made up. Noah is fictitious, as are Adam and Eve, Cain and Able, the Garden of Eden. The whole lot is nicely written but with no basis in fact. None of it really happened. The Dutch boat is as real as ET or Star Wars. To even offer the slightest suggestion that it proves the Ark was real seriously deminishes your credibility.

That's your view, as an Atheist ... I don't share your denial of the Word of God in the Bible ... and neither does any other Christian either. Christians may differ on exactly how we think that God Created ... but we all proclaim the Creed that He did!!!

The Concrete Doctor wrote: »

Maybe though, you can prove otherwise.

You're the guys supporting the legally enforced teaching of the God-denying doctrines of Atheism under the guise of science to children of all relgions and none ... while simultaneously demanding the banning by law of any mention of God from Irish schools.

The onus is on you to justify such legal privilege for God-denying beliefs within schools and such intolerance directed against the belief in God by the majority of practically every school community in Ireland.

The tail is trying to wag the dog here!!!

Like I have said, the reasonable and fair position is to mandate the teaching of Natural Selection of genetic diversity (which is a fact) within science class ... with the teaching of all 'origins' hypotheses (Creation/Abiogenesis/M2MEvolution) confined to Comparative Religion class.

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 2)

Comments