Because asking questions over and over only exhausts a person of questions. It is a way to find answers. But the questions themselves are not the answers.
Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter MichaelCadry
- Start date
- Status
Under Pressure
Member
I had to ask many many questions to get to where I am today.:liberals:
Perhaps you could be a little less cryptic.
Robert_1965
New member
Hi Stuart, I do realize that, but the bible is written on many levels. The literal story deals with distance, when Israel sees the ark of the covenant (which represents the presence and power of God), they were to remove from their place and go after it. But they were to keep a space of about 2000 cubits between them and the ark.
The prophetic story deals with time, when the nation of Israel saw Jesus (the presence and power of God), they were removed from their place and the kingdom was turned over to the Gentiles. Israel will go after Jesus but the space between them and Jesus will be about 2000 years.
I wouldn't base doctrine on this one foreshadowing story, but there are several other foreshadows that point to the 2000 year time frame. Hosea 6:2 is another cool verse... Two days (one day is as a thousand years) after the Lord has torn Israel, he will heal them.
Hos_6:2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
Since you think so, how about telling us the two best arguments he makes? If you don't competent to evaluate what he's said, feel free to ignore the request.
I'm sorry? What did you just say? Just watch the video and read the link. I don't have a doctorate, he does. And it relates to Geology. And he knows the scriptures.
Under Pressure
Member
Yeah, so? Did all of your questions have answers?
I have a new question. But the questions of old are mostly all answered or resolved.
alwight
New member
My understanding of Dr. Terry Mortenson is that despite an albeit genuine PhD in the History of Geology he is virtually an unknown in the field of actual geology itself, since I had wondered what "History of Geology" actually was.
I think it involves simply what it says, the history of geology.
He is much more well known as a YEC who works and speaks for AiG.
Mortenson's only "reasoning" for not accepting millions of years comes from Genesis not geology. He is bound by whatever Genesis says, so as AiG say themselves:
"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information."
https://answersingenesis.org/about/faith/
It matters not to AiG or Mortenson what science actually says simply because Genesis will always trump any of it for them.
Clearly Mortenson's only "evidence" in this video is Genesis and just like him I doubt that you are even remotely capable of doubting its literal accuracy, or ever accepting that science (not being shackled to Genesis) just might know rather more than anyone at AiG.
Nope. Did you read the article as well as watch the video? That is not what he says.
alwight
New member
Then show me where his arguments are scientific and not simply from or trumped ultimately by Genesis?
He talks about the history of geology, which is a scientific discipline, and he provides insight into what has happened.
alwight
New member
Can you not put them into words of your own instead of waving at a page full of typical AiG Biblical assertions and presumptions?
Barbarian, regarding Mortensen:
Since you think so, how about telling us the two best arguments he makes? If you don't competent to evaluate what he's said, feel free to ignore the request.
Don't be sorry. Just tell us what, about his argument, you found convincing. I
So it's entirely faith-based for you? Given that his position is held by a minority of Christians, and is contrary to Genesis, what gives you faith that he's right?
He doesn't have one in any science, either. It's in "History of Geology", whatever that is. And he has no undergraduate credential in science, either. He has a degree in math and a Master's in theology.
In the sense that studying the history of space exploration relates to piloting spacecraft.
Since you think so, how about telling us the two best arguments he makes? If you don't competent to evaluate what he's said, feel free to ignore the request.
Don't be sorry. Just tell us what, about his argument, you found convincing. I
So it's entirely faith-based for you? Given that his position is held by a minority of Christians, and is contrary to Genesis, what gives you faith that he's right?
He doesn't have one in any science, either. It's in "History of Geology", whatever that is. And he has no undergraduate credential in science, either. He has a degree in math and a Master's in theology.
In the sense that studying the history of space exploration relates to piloting spacecraft.
If it is that he is a doctor, I am not.
No, I meant I don't understand what you are asking me to do. It doesn't make sense. I listened to and watched the whole thing. I read the entire article. I disagree with nothing.
Why would you say it is contrary to Genesis? In what respect?
Is the History of Geology a science degree is your question? I don't have a degree in the history of Geology. He does!
No. In the sense that macro evolution does not make sense. But he is talking about geology.
noguru
Well-known member
:think:
So you do not think what a person says matters and that a person can say moronic things without being called out on that? How convenient for you morons.
Forest Gump said:
Nothing about moronic things people say or people being morons either.:think:
So you do not think what a person says matters and that a person can say moronic things without being called out on that? How convenient for you morons.
No one is a moron. To suggest otherwise is idiocy.
noguru
Well-known member
- Status