The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)

ColmDawson

liamw wrote: »

I was wondering what garbage you would pull out of your hat for this one. You've outdone yourself... God having a laugh, classic

I was also entertained by his notion that evolutionists think body parts are perfectly formed. The eye is another good example of evolution not producing a perfectly sensibly-formed organ.

Zombrex

Sam Vimes wrote: »

He's a joker that god fella

lol

It looks designed except when it doesn't look designed because the designer was having a laugh/drunk/a moron/using the wrong hand/cranky



so it doesn't look designed them. :rolleyes:

It is sort of becoming difficult to expression in words the moronic nature of Creationis/ID.

J C

gosplan wrote: »

That's your response?

'God did it because He could'

... and evolution didn't do it because it couldn't!!!

... the truth will set you free!!!:):D

J C

gosplan wrote: »

I disagree with this hugely. I have no problem with people having faith but Creationist Scientists have an agenda.

... and Atheistic Evolutionists don't have an agenda???

Creation Science does have an agenda ... to use the scientific method to scientifically evaluate the evidence for Creation and by extension the existence of God ... so what??? ... get over it!!!:eek::D

... the Materialists have an agenda ... to use science to bolster their anti-God beliefs.
Creation Scientists are prepared to live and let live ... and we respect the rights of evolutionists to pursue their agenda.
Evolutionists, unfortunately aren't as magnanamous ... and they have even gone as far as re-defining science to exclude the consideration of the physical evidence for the actions of God ... how is that for a really big un-adulterated AGENDA!!!!:eek::D

gosplan wrote: »

Put simply I imagine it's quite hard to be impartial if you already know what you are looking to prove verify etc.

It's like a scientist that works for a tobacco company. Everyone knows what their results/findings/opinion is going to be in the end.

... objectivity is always a problem for 'fallen' Human Beings ... however, the critical examination and evaluation of the evidence for competing ideas usually sorts out any bias ...

... but Evolutionists just close their minds and redefine science to exclude competing ideas ... and if that fails they are quite prepared to sack anybody who has the temerity to come up with valid alternative hypotheses with which they fundamentally disagree!!!:eek::eek::(

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
... so what is the 'signature' of intelligent action in your Atheistic opinion?

... or do the atheists believe that intelligent action cannot be determined scientifically???

... if they think that intelligent cause cannot be objectively established ... they must have great qualms of conscience when giving forensic evidence in criminal trials ... or when they spend public money on things like SETI to search for extra-terrestrial 'signatures' of intelligent action ... that they believe cannot be scientifically established!!!!

Sam Vimes
Intelligent action can be intelligently established but it just so happens that the methods that we normally think of as being reliable for determining whether or not there was intelligent action cannot be applied to things that self-replicate imperfectly. Neither forensic evidence nor electrical signals are self-replicating so neither of them can undergo billions of years of mutation selection that can produce a result that appears as if it has been designed, albeit by a very unintelligent "designer".

... but you still haven't answered my question as to what exactly is the 'signature' of intelligent activity????
... for example, what is the 'marker' on an electrical signal that would differentiate one that has been intelligently created from one that has been spontaneously generated by purely materialistic processes?

... you see, I suspect ... indeed I actually know, that the Atheists know what this 'signature' is ... it is CSI ... and they use it's equivalent in SETI ... but they refuse to use it (for their own agenda) when it comes to living processes!!!:D:)

J C

del88 wrote: »

Not much of an argument.....if you use that line of argument then there's nothing to discuss...i suppose that all the evidence of evolution is just gods way of having a laugh...he just teasing us......what a kidder.:D

... well it beats all the handwaving about the RLN having an evolutionary origiin ... when non-intelligently directed processes are mathematically incapable of generating even one simple specific protein ... never mind the hundreds of different highly specified proteins and other biomolecules required to make just one cell in the RLN !!!!:eek::cool:

J C

Wicknight wrote: »

Really? You modelled God? Interesting, would love to see that. :rolleyes:

... God modelled Himself !!!

... and you can have a personal encounter with Him any time you stop believing in your own infallibility ... and believe on Him to Save you!!!:):D

J C

liamw wrote: »

I was wondering what garbage you would pull out of your hat for this one. You've outdone yourself... God having a laugh, classic

... I'm sure when He looks at the sheer audacity of some of the Human Beings that He created using their God-given free-will to defy Him ... He must be tempted to laugh ... as the only alternative would be to cry!!!!:):D

Sam Vimes wrote: »

He's a joker that god fella

... see my posting immediately above!!!:D:cool:

gosplan

J C wrote: »

... and evolution didn't do it because it couldn't!!!

... the truth will set you free!!!:):D

Free from having to argue logically?

J C

gosplan wrote: »

Free from having to argue logically?

... free from a darkened, strong-willed, sinful soul!!!!!:):D

gosplan

J C wrote: »

Creation Science does have an agenda ... to use the scientific method to scientifically evaluate the evidence for Creation and by extension the existence of God ... so what??? ... get over it!!!:eek::D

So you're agreeing that when they finish 'evaluating the evidence', they know what they want to see in the results. i.e. they are not impartial.

J C wrote: »

physical evidence for the actions of God

Please let me know what this is, or is it just more 'here's a gap in evolution therefore the whole theory is invalid and god must exist'.

I'm willing to bet it is.

Unexplained = God ... who can argue with that?

gosplan

Just out of curiosity, when you say

J C wrote: »

... Creationists have all of the models that work ... when it comes to the origins question

but then are asked about the model you have for God and reply

J C wrote: »

... God modelled Himself !!!

Do you mean overall that creationists have one model for everything, a belief in God the creator, and only he knows the details?

If this is the case, it's all faith-based. I have no problem with basing a large part, or all of your life, on faith ... but how can you make it a science?

This is what we touched on a few posts ago.

I have no problem with faith, taking things on faith, and believing things because of your faith but you cannot make it a science. You believe because you believe. if you want to go and scientifically prove things, then it's not really faith any more, is it?

“So you believe because you’ve seen with your own eyes. Even better blessings are in store for those who believe without seeing.” (John 20:29)

J C

ColmDawson wrote: »

I was also entertained by his notion that evolutionists think body parts are perfectly formed. The eye is another good example of evolution not producing a perfectly sensibly-formed organ.

... yet another Evolutionist Myth ... the Human eye is indeed perfectly designed!!!!
... it requires an enormous blood supply to provide the high energy levels required by the photo-receptors and to cool the heat released by the light that is absorbed by the pigment epithelium ... and the design is optimised to achieve this!!!
... and you can read all about it here....
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=2476

J C

gosplan wrote: »

So you're agreeing that when they finish 'evaluating the evidence', they know what they want to see in the results. i.e. they are not impartial.

... they are rational ... and when they see all of the evidence stack up in favour of Creation this does tend to confirm that their hypotheses are valid!!!!

... I wonder how do the Evolutionists explain why they still hold to a theory that has less evidence in support of it than the hypothesis that Hens grow from feathers planted in the ground!!!
... sounds like partiality doesn't even begin to describe such denial!!!:eek::cool:

The Mad Hatter

J C wrote: »

... yet another Evolutionist Myth ... the Human eye is indeed perfectly designed!!!!
... it requires an enormous blood supply to provide the high energy levels required by the photo-receptors and to cool the resultant heat released by the light that is absorbed by the pigment epithelium ... and the design is optimised to achieve this!!!
... and you can read all about it here....
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=2476

Why is the retina backwards?

J C

gosplan wrote: »

I have no problem with faith, taking things on faith, and believing things because of your faith but you cannot make it a science. You believe because you believe. if you want to go and scientifically prove things, then it's not really faith any more, is it?

“So you believe because you’ve seen with your own eyes. Even better blessings are in store for those who believe without seeing.” (John 20:29)

... we now have scientific proof for the existence of God ... and the fact that He Created all life ...
... we still need faith to accept that Jesus Christ is God ... and He will Save all who believe on Him!!!:):D

... what is amazing is that the mainstream churches haven't 'copped on' to these facts ... but then they seem to have many other pressing things on their minds ... and the fact that Creation Science has proven that God exists doesn't seem to rank very high on their list of priorities!!!:eek::D

... and therein lies the opportunity that has been mercilessly exploited by the Materialists!!!:):D

J C

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Why is the retina backwards?

... I have just told you ... you have a choice of having the massive Choroid blood supply (to cool the heat energy released in the eye from incident light and the high-energy activity of the sensory apparatus) in front of the photo-receptors as well as the opaque pigment epithelium, that absorbs the excess light energy (which would result in complete blindness) ... or having the nerve cells and other semi-transparent organelles in front of the photo-receptors (which don't materially affect visual acuity) ... kind of obvious which design is best for a warm-blooded mammal????!!!:):D:eek:

J C

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Why is the retina backwards?

... please tell me what is wrong with it !!!:):D

StealthRolex

I have no desire to discuss these and present them for your education. We could be in for a bumpy ride soon - best prepare

After the year 1900, toward the middle of the 20th century, the people of that time will become unrecognisable. When the time for the Advent of the Antichrist approaches, peoples minds will grow cloudy from carnal passions, and dishonour and lawlessness will grow stronger. Then the world will become unrecognisable. Peoples appearances will change, and it will be impossible to distinguish men from women due to there shamelessness in dress and style of hair. These people will be cruel and will be like wild animals because of the temptations of the Antichrist. There will be no respect for parents or elders, love will disappear, and Christian pastors, bishops, and priests will become vain men, completely failing to distinguish the right hand way from the left. At that time the morals and traditions of Christians and the Church will change. People will abandon modesty, and dissipation will reign. Falsehood and greed will attain great proportions, and woe to those who pile up treasures. Lust, adultery, homosexuality, secret deeds and murder will rule in society. - St. Nilus, AD 430

"Europe will be afflicted by horrable punishments, when the papal chair is empty. Wickedness, spitefulness and slandering will provoke a small nation, that will set on the fire by killing a prince. Seven realms will rise against the bird with two heads and the bird with one head."......"In east and west a large struggle will be, which destroys many humans." ......"Powerless humans will watch this. Four years and five months the riot will take. famine, epidemics and plague will cause more victims than the war." ..."The time will come, when you neither can buy nor sell. Bread will be assigned and marked. The seas will color themselves with blood. ...The carriages will drive without horses, fiery dragons will fly through the air and belch fire and sulfur, destroy cities and villages." ....."The winner carries a cross on the breast; and between the seven cities with the seven towers the decision takes place. There is a crucifix between two lime trees. The war will begin, when the ears fully lean, but reaching his highest point, when the cherry trees flower for the second time." - Saint Padre Pio, AD 1918

"We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel versus the anti-Gospel." - Pope John Paul II, AD 1976-2005

more for those interested here

Those of a scientific bent might like to start here

J C

StealthRolex wrote: »

I have no desire to discuss these and present them for your education.

"We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has gone through. I do not think that wide circles of American society or wide circles of the Christian community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-Church, of the Gospel versus the anti-Gospel." - Pope John Paul II, AD 1976-2005

... tell me about it!!!!:):D

It is interesting that this particular quote was made in the early years of His Pontificate before he was shot by Ali Agca ... and a few years afterwards in 1986 John Paul organised the now infamous Assisi Gathering of every religion including witch doctors and voodoo practitioners and presented them as different ways of reaching the same God!!!

... some say that John Paul was never quite the same man after the shooting !!!:eek::D:)

Zombrex

the sun reaches its maximum every 11 years ... the world didn't end 9 years ago it is not going to end in 2013

Zombrex

J C wrote: »

... God modelled Himself !!!

So lets be clear, when you said scientists have all the models they need to scientifically study creation you would just making stupid stuff up? Correct?

StealthRolex

Wicknight wrote: »

the sun reaches its maximum every 11 years ... the world didn't end 9 years ago it is not going to end in 2013

Can I suggest you review the latest in the science journals. New Scientist has been discussing a coronal mass ejections bigger than expected. Currently the sun is shrinking and the sun spots have gone missing. They are overdue by some time.

What you say is true but due to reliance on technology we are more exposed now in the developed West. I am not suggesting the world will end in 2013 however many scientists are of the opinion that there is a risk of major electrical power grid and satellite failures during the expected solar storms.

J C

Wicknight wrote: »

So lets be clear, when you said scientists have all the models they need to scientifically study creation you would just making stupid stuff up? Correct?

... the only crowd making it up as they go along are the Evolutionists ... indeed what else can they do except draw on their imaginations ... because neither logic nor the physical evidence is on their side!!!!:):D

Zombrex

StealthRolex wrote: »

Can I suggest you review the latest in the science journals. New Scientist has been discussing a solar maximum bigger than expected and currently the sun is shrinking and the sun spots have gone missing. They are overdue by some time.

What you say is true but due to reliance on technology we are more exposed now in the developed West. I am not suggesting the world will end in 2013 however many scientists are of the opinion that there is a risk of major electrical power grid and satellite failures during the expected solar storms.

for several hours apparently, based on a "nasty" blast in 1989.

this is barely news let alone the signally of the apocalypse.

Or put it another way, can I come back to you in 30 years when nothing significant has happened and see if you are still a Christian? I imagine that when nothing significant happens this will not in anyway dent your faith

Zombrex

J C wrote: »

... the only crowd making it up as they go along are the Evolutionists ... indeed what else can they do except draw on their imaginations ... because neither logic nor the physical evidence is on their side!!!!:):D

so when you claimed what you originally claimed were you mistaken or lying?

StealthRolex

Wicknight wrote: »

for several hours apparently, based on a "nasty" blast in 1989.

this is barely news let alone the signally of the apocalypse.

from the same source

The most powerful solar outburst on record happened in 1859. At that time, it merely disrupted telegraph communication. But if it happened today, it could cause lasting damage to electric power grids, with cascading effects on the supply of water, perishable food, medicine and other necessities, the report says.

Damaged transformers, which change the electricity's voltage, could be a particularly big problem. "If a large number of those were taken out, it could take quite a while to replace them," says Baker. "There's not a lot of stock of them, and they have to be built to order."

Wicknight wrote: »

Or put it another way, can I come back to you in 30 years when nothing significant has happened and see if you are still a Christian? I imagine that when nothing significant happens this will not in anyway dent your faith

Feel free and if something does we'll see if you're still an atheist

My faith is not based on prophesy and I need no proof to maintain it so whatever happens or does not will make no difference to me.

Zombrex

StealthRolex wrote: »

Feel free and if something does we'll see if you're still an atheist

My faith is not based on prophesy and I need no proof to maintain it so whatever happens or does not will make no difference to me.

So if you think so little of this why exactly would I be worried about it?

StealthRolex

Wicknight wrote: »

So if you think so little of this why exactly would I be worried about it?

What makes you think I think little of them? Would it make any difference if I thought much of them? Most likely you would think even less.
I find it interesting that there are prophesies that appear to be targeted around this timeframe and that there are scientific studies that suggest we could lose our electrical power and satellites, and have climate changes due to solar storms in the foreseeable future.

Make of it what you will. It's your choice.

Your contempt for Christian prophecy was expected. Your contempt for science speaks volumes.

Sam Vimes

J C wrote: »

... but you still haven't answered my question as to what exactly is the 'signature' of intelligent activity????
... for example, what is the 'marker' on an electrical signal that would differentiate one that has been intelligently created from one that has been spontaneously generated by purely materialistic processes?

... you see, I suspect ... indeed I actually know, that the Atheists know what this 'signature' is ... it is CSI ... and they use it's equivalent in SETI ... but they refuse to use it (for their own agenda) when it comes to living processes!!!:D:)

CSI Miami or CSI New York?