Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Battle Talk ~ BR IX

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by aharvey
    This is of course why none of this belongs in a debate about science!

    What do you think about the notion that Jim merely believes with sure, unshakable, unwavering certainty that God gave him his sure, unshakable, unwavering certainty that the Bible is complete, literal, and inerrant?

    And now, consider a second, separate notion: the basis for his sure, unshakable, unwavering certainty that God gave him this gift is in fact his his sure, unshakable, unwavering certainty that the Bible is complete, literal, and inerrant.

    Or is there another basis for his sure, unshakable, unwavering certainty that God gave him this gift?
    Yes, it strikes me as quite circular as well, and I've talked to him about that.

    Interestingly, he admits that some people have believed they were regenerate, when actually they were mistaken. In his case, however, he is certain that he is not wrong (about being regenerate himself, and thus about the "surety" of his "a priori" belief in the "verity" of the Bible...)
    "Perhaps everything terrible is in its deepest being something that needs our love" ~ Rainer Maria Rilke

    Comment


    • Jim,

      In your initial post you stated:
      I view the standard ID arguments, such as irreducible complexity, as specious and based on an incoherent and indefensible "Intelligent Designer of the Gaps" (IDOG) thesis.
      If you can find the time could you explain in more detail what you are saying?

      I am really enjoying your comments.

      In His grace,--Jerry

      Comment


      • Example : Sediment level on the entire Earth's surface due to the flood,there is not once square inch on the planet not covered in hundreds of feet, and in places kilometers of sediment...the fossils found here show they were instantly smothered by the flood..the fact that, marine fossils are found throughout the geological column points strongly to a flood-based interpretation of the fossil formation. It should also be noted that many of the animals alive today are virtually identical to their fossilized ancestors arguing against million of years separating their fossils from today.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Metalking
          Example : Sediment level on the entire Earth's surface due to the flood,there is not once square inch on the planet not covered in hundreds of feet, and in places kilometers of sediment...the fossils found here show they were instantly smothered by the flood..the fact that, marine fossils are found throughout the geological column points strongly to a flood-based interpretation of the fossil formation. It should also be noted that many of the animals alive today are virtually identical to their fossilized ancestors arguing against million of years separating their fossils from today.
          It should be noted that most fossilized animals and plants are not represented by current species.
          And the first part of that post, is I think, simply incorrect.
          I think most fossils are marine fossils cause they are already in water and more likely to be then covered by sediment. So the relationship you cite does not seem to be cause and effect.
          Further, do we find large mammal species with the earliest marine fossils? I think not, and why not?
          "Against stupidity, the gods themselves fight in vain", G. Smiley

          "Send money, guns and lawyers..." W. Zevon

          "If it is possible for something to happen, that is evidence that it did happen." Stripe on TOL

          "There but for fortune...", P. Ochs

          Comment


          • Example 2 :Assuming that man has been on the earth for a million years or so, as the evolutionist adamantly insists, we calculate that the entire universe would now be filled full of dead bodies. If you use math to calculate the population from the time of Noah's flood you come up with a much closer to correct answer.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Metalking
              Example 2 :Assuming that man has been on the earth for a million years or so, as the evolutionist adamantly insists, we calculate that the entire universe would now be filled full of dead bodies. If you use math to calculate the population from the time of Noah's flood you come up with a much closer to correct answer.

              Things don't rot in your world?
              Everyman is a voice in the dark.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Metalking
                Example 2 :Assuming that man has been on the earth for a million years or so, as the evolutionist adamantly insists, we calculate that the entire universe would now be filled full of dead bodies. If you use math to calculate the population from the time of Noah's flood you come up with a much closer to correct answer.
                Who's "we"?
                Everyman is a voice in the dark.

                Comment


                • Example 2 :Assuming that man has been on the earth for a million years or so, as the evolutionist adamantly insists, we calculate that the entire universe would now be filled full of dead bodies. If you use math to calculate the population from the time of Noah's flood you come up with a much closer to correct answer.
                  Rofl. Thanks for the specifics and calculations you provide. I'm not even going to bother with this one, others may take the time.
                  “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Metalking
                    Example 2 :Assuming that man has been on the earth for a million years or so, as the evolutionist adamantly insists, we calculate that the entire universe would now be filled full of dead bodies. If you use math to calculate the population from the time of Noah's flood you come up with a much closer to correct answer.
                    Calculate How?
                    Everyman is a voice in the dark.

                    Comment


                    • We need ThePhy to write a massive refutation on why the universe isn't full of dead bodies.
                      Everyman is a voice in the dark.

                      Comment


                      • NEWS FLASH
                        by Metalking
                        The Universe is not full of dead bodies, yet more evidence that it was created 6000 yrs. ago by a spirit being named Yaweh, more to follow............................................ .
                        Everyman is a voice in the dark.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by fool
                          We need ThePhy to write a massive refutation on why the universe isn't full of dead bodies.
                          Well, we can start with fungi, bacteria, flies, maggots, little critters, bigger critters. What an absurd statement. "A universe full of dead bodies"
                          And, who, Kemo sabe, is "we"?
                          "Against stupidity, the gods themselves fight in vain", G. Smiley

                          "Send money, guns and lawyers..." W. Zevon

                          "If it is possible for something to happen, that is evidence that it did happen." Stripe on TOL

                          "There but for fortune...", P. Ochs

                          Comment


                          • Population formula = http://www.ldolphin.org/popul.html

                            Comment


                            • m_d,

                              I found a few moments between finals to answer your questions.

                              Originally posted by mighty_duck
                              2. What does unaccountable mean to you? Jim defined "account" as rationally explain. Is this an accpetable definition?
                              That definition is somewhat anemic. And used in this context, that definition seems question begging to my mind. I would say that, used in this context, "account" means "to provide an ontological basis."

                              1 . Why do you assume that this world is evidence of God's nature? And how do you choose which parts? I'm sure you don't attribute man's evils, nature's careless killing, etc. to God. But why not?
                              Of course this entails scurrying down the rabbit-hole of the cosmological argument. If you reject the cosmological argument for the existence of God, then there's no need to follow this course.

                              Looking forward,

                              SS

                              Comment


                              • Two paleontologists from the Museum of Natural History in Paris reported in Scientific American (September, 1988, p.70) that the evidence 'tells a contradictory story. They say this because some of the fossils are of marine (saltwater) creatures, some are definitely freshwater dwellers (e.g. amphibious), and some are definitely land creatures (e.g. spiders, scorpions, millipedes and certain insects and reptiles).

                                The massive worldwide coal deposits also lend further proof to sudden destruction of immense primordial forests. Coal is formed when trees, plants, roots, bark, or any vegetation (peat) are buried by water and sediment. The burial of this vegetation by sediment causes compaction, which squeezes out the water and over time through the chemical processes of decay coal is formed. Coal is actually fossilized decayed vegetation or peat.

                                The random order of the fossils. The fossils within the sediments do not exhibit strong evidence of a record of evolution with simple animals at the bottom, progressing type by type up to more and more complex animals. The order is often random or completely upside down or out of order for evolution. But this would be expected in a global flood catastrophe. Fossils from the supposed different 'ages' are often found mixed together. This indicates a huge mixing of animal bones that is not consistent with a local flood.

                                Example of random mixing of fossils. In excess of 3,000,000 fossils, representing more than 565 different species have been discovered in the La Brea Tar Pits in Los Angeles, California.

                                . Difficult evidence to explain. In addition, in many sedimentary rock layers geologists find some very odd features. For example, fossilized trees buried at all angles, upside-down and right-side-up, often passing through multiple rock layers, obviously the result of a marine cataclysm. These "polystrate" fossils (poly, meaning more than one; strate, meaning rock layer) are a worldwide phenomenon.
                                http://www.calvaryag.org/apologetics...ence_flood.htm

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X