Coitus Interruptus... Flirty Turtles, Fossils and the Flood

[George Affleck]

Well, no.
But more importantly from a theological standpoint, since your understanding of the real world is a bit suspect, your last sentence suggests your deity does not know the future.

...when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

How can you have an opinion about the abilities or character of that which does not exist?

 

[Jonahdog]

...when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

How can you have an opinion about the abilities or character of that which does not exist?

Simple, your deity is supposed to be all-knowing, yet he was unaware of what Adam and Eve would do, unaware of the fact that later he would have to kill all the evil people in the world (including infants). But apparently that's what happened.

 

[George Affleck]

Simple, your deity is supposed to be all-knowing, yet he was unaware of what Adam and Eve would do, unaware of the fact that later he would have to kill all the evil people in the world (including infants). But apparently that's what happened.

You cannot give an answer that does not prove my point. Because theology is the study of God, those who believe that God is non-existent likewise have a non-existent theology.

Not knowing God leads you inevitably into error. Theology necessitates a God given knowledge. To those who have, more shall be added. To those who have not, even that which they have shall be taken away.

 

[Stripe]

Simple, your deity is supposed to be all-knowing, yet he was unaware of what Adam and Eve would do, unaware of the fact that later he would have to kill all the evil people in the world (including infants). But apparently that's what happened.

Darwinists will talk about anything to avoid the evidence.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Dear 6days and George Affleck,

I must mention here also that it is written in Rev. 14:7KJV, "Fear God, and give Him glory, for the 'hour' of His judgment is come upon all of the Earth, and worship Him Who made Heaven and Earth, and the sea, and the FOUNTAINS of WATERS." Of course there are vast amounts of water below the crust of the Earth and most likely, beneath the deepest of oceans. You never know what God has in store for us that is actually truth, so why stop here. I'm just trying to say that water covered the entire Earth or else the birds on the rest of the Earth would have flown to higher mountains as the waters got deeper and they wouldn't have died too, and the animals on the rest of the Earth would just have lived instead, when God is very definite on this: That He put an end to those on Earth, not just those in a certain location. I hope that this helps 6days and George A. I can't see why some people just don't get it. Doesn't God put His Bow in the sky all over the Earth, not just in one area?

I'm sorry I don't get to venture off of my Creation thread often because it keeps me so busy, but I wanted to check this thread out again. It's only the second time I've gotten on here.

Our God Is Our Shield,

Michael

 

[Jonahdog]

You cannot give an answer that does not prove my point. Because theology is the study of God, those who believe that God is non-existent likewise have a non-existent theology.

Not knowing God leads you inevitably into error. Theology necessitates a God given knowledge. To those who have, more shall be added. To those who have not, even that which they have shall be taken away.

Then explain why I am incorrect. Your all-knowing deity appears not to be, based on the Bible

 

[Jonahdog]

Darwinists will talk about anything to avoid the evidence.

Hi Stripey, interesting comment coming from someone who was recently asked over and over for certain bits of evidence he claimed he posted earlier but was unable to refer to.

 

[George Affleck]

Then explain why I am incorrect. Your all-knowing deity appears not to be, based on the Bible

...seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Matt 6:33KJV

Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. Tit 1:15KJV

Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;
If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;
Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.
For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding. Prov 2:3-6 KJV

 

[Stripe]

Hi Stripey, interesting comment coming from someone who was recently asked over and over for certain bits of evidence he claimed he posted earlier but was unable to refer to.

The evidence: Turtles frozen in rock.
The necessary conditions: Water, sediment, cement.

So much for your attempt at the tu quoque fallacy.

 

[6days]

Why did you do that if you didn't think the retired vet was more qualified to speak about comparative genomics than geneticists?

Jose...why do you think your opinion is valid on matters of theology? Shall we just dismiss your comments from now on because you are less qualified than theologians?

Unable to refute arguments you attacked the persons qualifications, rather than the argument. If I quote a geneticist saying the same things as the retired vet, does that suddenly make the comments valid?

I'm glad you are here in TOL Jose.

 

[6days]

Creationists love to claim they take the whole Bible literally, but are perfectly happy to make things figurative when they disagree with what they accept as science. You do the very things you accuse me of doing and worse since you make things up that aren't even there.

That is false Alate. I have never heard anyone claim the whole Bible should be taken literally. The Bible contains poetry, parables, metaphors, allegory, theology.....and history. Well known atheist Jerry Coyne wrote an article mocking theistic evolutionists on how they are inconsistent in picking and choosing what to believe from the Bible.

Almost every historian mixes allegory into his writings, and theistic evolutionists seem to read it with understanding. For example...A report from the battlefield in 1917:
"So today began another titanic conflict which the world will hold its breath to watch because of all that hangs upon it. I have seen the fury of this beginning, and all the sky on fire with it...."

Its easy to discern a real battle is being described with metaphors. isn't it? Why is the Bible so difficult for you? Answer...you would rather believe man's secular reasoning, than God's Holy Word.

 

[CabinetMaker]

That is false Alate. I have never heard anyone claim the whole Bible should be taken literally. The Bible contains poetry, parables, metaphors, allegory, theology.....and history. Well known atheist Jerry Coyne wrote an article mocking theistic evolutionists on how they are inconsistent in picking and choosing what to believe from the Bible.

Almost every historian mixes allegory into his writings, and theistic evolutionists seem to read it with understanding. For example...A report from the battlefield in 1917:
"So today began another titanic conflict which the world will hold its breath to watch because of all that hangs upon it. I have seen the fury of this beginning, and all the sky on fire with it...."

Its easy to discern a real battle is being described with metaphors. isn't it? Why is the Bible so difficult for you? Answer...you would rather believe man's secular reasoning, than God's Holy Word.

Interesting choice. How do you determine that this a poetic description of a battle and Genesis is a historical account? Is it not possible that Genesis is a poetic account and not historical? Please explain your reasoning.

 

[Stripe]

Interesting choice. How do you determine that this a poetic description of a battle and Genesis is a historical account? Is it not possible that Genesis is a poetic account and not historical? Please explain your reasoning.

Darwinists will do everything they can to make sure the evidence is not discussed.

 

[Jose Fly]

Jose...why do you think your opinion is valid on matters of theology? Shall we just dismiss your comments from now on because you are less qualified than theologians?

We can discuss that when I start making theological claims.

Unable to refute arguments you attacked the persons qualifications, rather than the argument.

But she didn't make any actual arguments about comparative genomics. That plus the fact that she has no qualifications in comparative genomics nor has she done any work at all in comparative genomics makes me wonder just what you thought posting that quote was supposed to do.

If I quote a geneticist saying the same things as the retired vet, does that suddenly make the comments valid?

Then that brings up another question...when trying to understand the state of the science in a particular field, is it better to go with what essentially everyone in that field describes, or with a single outlier who contradicts all the others?

If you think the latter is the better method, that makes me wonder if you apply it to other areas in your life, e.g., medical advice, IT support, car repair, etc.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Darwinists will do everything they can to make sure the evidence is not discussed.

He presented new evidence. I was asking him to discuss it. So sorry that you failed to understand that.

 

[Stripe]

He presented new evidence.

No, he didn't.

The evidence — which has gone almost wholly unconsidered by the Darwinists — is the turtles and the state they were found in. Darwinists hate discussing evidence, because they cannot stand to see their precious religion scrutinized. They're much like Mormons in that regard.

 

[CabinetMaker]

No, he didn't.

The evidence — which has gone almost wholly unconsidered by the Darwinists — is the turtles and the state they were found in. Darwinists hate discussing evidence, because they cannot stand to see their precious religion scrutinized. They're much like Mormons in that regard.

You must have missed the post where he presented the Bible as evidence for his position. I was asking him questions about that evidence. Since you obviously missed that post, I would suggest you not participate in further conversation regarding the new evidence offered as you are obviously ilequipped to speak to the subject.

 

[Stripe]

You must have missed the post where he presented the Bible as evidence for his position. I was asking him questions about that evidence. Since you obviously missed that post, I would suggest you not participate in further conversation regarding the new evidence offered as you are obviously ilequipped to speak to the subject.

You obviously missed the thread.

We know why you're desperate to talk about anything apart from the evidence.

Turtles frozen in rock — Darwinists running for the hills.

 

[CabinetMaker]

You obviously missed the thread.

We know why you're desperate to talk about anything apart from the evidence.

Turtles frozen in rock — Darwinists running for the hills.

Really Stripe, you are starting to look quite pathetic and desperate. Let me help you with your ignorance. 6-Days posted a response in post number 111, you can scroll up to see it. I would strongly recommend that you do that. He stated that history sometimes uses allegory to describe events in a more poetic way. Remember when you claimed that Genesis is history? Well, 6-days also offers Genesis as historical evidence. Since 6-Days says that history can include allegorical accounts, is was questioning the evidence known as Genesis and offered as evidence. Does that help? Can you see how I was discussing evidence offered by both you and 6-days?

 

[George Affleck]

That is false Alate. I have never heard anyone claim the whole Bible should be taken literally.

I do!

Theological definition for "literal"
A literal interpretation is that which discovers the authentic meaning of the text in its grammatical forms with consideration for (1) the historical, cultural and linguistic context, (2) the author's presentation style and literary devices, and (3) the integrity and harmony of the Scriptures.

Literal is not a synonym for physical or face value.
It means authentic, actual, the authors original intent(s), that which was literated.

The literal meaning of "Our God is a consuming fire" is that God will consume us when we serve Him in reverence and godly fear.