Noah's Ark?

Originally posted by galveston75
Stupid answer and not even close...

All I really want to know is whether you use technology to make decisions at work. Do you?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Your answer is about as clear as the mud you can't find evidence for!! So i'll take that as a no.

Why not just say so?!

I've answered knob that as much as I don't know, neither do you. So because of that your idea of the ice caps being hundreds of thousands of years old which you can't prove either, does not prove the flood did not happen. I have no idea now what I can say to you to get this point accross.

Originally posted by PBE6
All I really want to know is whether you use technology to make decisions at work. Do you?

Yes and technology is fantastic. But the point I'm sure your getting at is evolution has not been proved by any technology. But the physical things we use today are real and in front of our eyes to see. Evolution to this day has notibng to prove it's reality.

Originally posted by galveston75
I've answered knob that as much as I don't know, neither do you. So because of that your idea of the ice caps being hundreds of thousands of years old which you can't prove either, does not prove the flood did not happen. I have no idea now what I can say to you to get this point accross.

The scientific consensus is that the ice caps are certainly over 5,000yrs old, you rather bizarrely provided the evidence from me on the link you posted. When i highlighted this to you, you just chose to ignore it, which is nothing new.

If you think the ice caps aren't that old, provide text or a scientist who supports your view. Bottom line, you can't, otherwise you would have done so. I'll leave you with some words of an evangelical Christian who happens also to be a geologist.

"The maintenance of modern creationism and Flood geology not only is useless apologetically with unbelieving scientists, it is harmful. Although many who have no scientific training have been swayed by creationist arguments, the unbelieving scientist will reason that a Christianity that believes in such nonsense must be a religion not worthy of his interest. . . . Modern creationism in this sense is apologetically and evangelistically ineffective. It could even be a hindrance to the gospel.

"Another possible danger is that in presenting the gospel to the lost and in defending God's truth we ourselves will seem to be false. It is time for Christian people to recognize that the defense of this modern, young-Earth, Flood-geology creationism is simply not truthful. It is simply not in accord with the facts that God has given. Creationism must be abandoned by Christians before harm is done. . . ."

Young, Davis, 1988. Christianity and the Age of the Earth. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Originally posted by galveston75
.... A very old earth is not a fact as they cannot prove that with current dating technics. ....

On the contrary. That the earth is millions and billions of years old (and I have no idea whether you call that very old or not, but I do) is factual and proven.

That you would say this fact - yeah, I'm calling it a fact, because it is - is not so leads to one of two conclusions: 1) You do not understand science, and are therefore in no position to determine what is fact or not, or 2) You choose a different basis for what you wish to define as fact. That is to say, you are quite willing to accept opinion as fact.

Either way it is errant and not rational thinking, and you get to be wrong if this statement is accurate as stated.

Originally posted by Badwater
On the contrary. That the earth is millions and billions of years old (and I have no idea whether you call that very old or not, but I do) is factual and proven.

That you would say this fact - yeah, I'm calling it a fact, because it is - is not so leads to one of two conclusions: 1) You do not understand science, and are therefore in no position to deter ...[text shortened]... ant and not rational thinking, and you get to be wrong if this statement is accurate as stated.

You do not understand or have the slightest insight into spiritual matters. So I guess we're even.

Originally posted by galveston75
You do not understand or have the slightest insight into spiritual matters. So I guess we're even.

On the contrary, as I have displayed many times.

To say that I'm not spiritual simply because I disagree with you is, to put it politely, stupendously juvenile on your part. Once again you spout out some sort of deranged conclusion absent of any foundational basis. You do not know me but that does not prevent you from attacking my spiritual makeup.

Nice going, Mr. Christian - no wonder there is such an anti-Christian sentiment what with the likes of you.

Originally posted by Badwater
On the contrary, as I have displayed many times.

To say that I'm not spiritual simply because I disagree with you is, to put it politely, stupendously juvenile on your part. Once again you spout out some sort of deranged conclusion absent of any foundational basis. You do not know me but that does not prevent you from attacking my spiritual makeup.

Ni ...[text shortened]... Mr. Christian - no wonder there is such an anti-Christian sentiment what with the likes of you.

Your intitled to your view...

Originally posted by galveston75
This is my answer which I thought as very clear... And it's my final answer.

I agree as I had said that a few postings ago. But it usually seems that most evolutionist or as I say, "ones who do not accept God", seem to think that evolution is a fact as it clearly is not. A very old earth is not a fact as they cannot prove that with current dating tech ...[text shortened]... y to convience the world that it's true when in fact the evidence is extremely weak at best.

so the evidence in the earth about the flood is clear, but the isotope dating methods, the logical discrepancies in the bible account, the many more scientists that support an old earth, archaeological evidence of civilizations predating your flood and continuing through your flood, all that is not clear.

you are insane.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
so the evidence in the earth about the flood is clear, but the isotope dating methods, the logical discrepancies in the bible account, the many more scientists that support an old earth, archaeological evidence of civilizations predating your flood and continuing through your flood, all that is not clear.

you are insane.

Your entiled to your view too...

Originally posted by Proper Knob
The scientific consensus is that the ice caps are certainly over 5,000yrs old, you rather bizarrely provided the evidence from me on the link you posted. When i highlighted this to you, you just chose to ignore it, which is nothing new.

If you think the ice caps aren't that old, provide text or a scientist who supports your view. Bottom line, you can' ...[text shortened]... ng, Davis, 1988. Christianity and the Age of the Earth. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Creationism must be abandoned by Christians before harm is done. . P.W. You know I respect your brain, I do, but this quote from,whomever.... , is a bit too much even for me. sorry, just too over the top, Big Bern

Originally posted by big bern
Creationism must be abandoned by Christians before harm is done. . P.W. You know I respect your brain, I do, but this quote from,whomever.... , is a bit too much even for me. sorry, just too over the top, Big Bern

just think about it. for argument sake. don't worry, i assume full responsibility for what might happen to your soul if you read the following.

please assume the following as true (i will draw a conclusion after)
1. There is a god. this shouldn't be hard as you already believe that.
2. god created everything, including humans.
3. god sent his son jesus to teach us some lessons about love, compassion and sacrifice.
this is what you already believe so nothing odd until now.

now think about some issues:
4. does it really matter HOW god created the world? is jesus's sacrifice in any way lessened by the existance or non existance of the flood?
5. does it really matter if some parts of the bible are not accurate? you already refuse to follow some of it. you don't own cattle and sacrifice them at the temple. you don't pay attention to that rule about mixing materials in clothes, do you? you don't stone your wife is she fails to prove she was a virgin prior to your wedding night
6. imagine you talking to children. imagine them asking why all things fall to the ground. will you explain to them all of newton's laws? will you explain them how black holes bend time-space around them? but then you will have to explain the concept of black holes. and time space. and it might take months. when all they really needed was a simple, not necessarily true answer to get them through the moment of curiosity. they didn't need all the physics poured into their brain. so why can't god give moses a simple answer when he asked how the world was created. bear in mind that those children could only count to how many sheep they had. and god had other pressing matters to attend to:

"yeah yeah i created the world in 7 days and i obliterated humans once for being jerks, now let's get you out of egypt and stop asking so many questions"
7. unscrupulous men lie about god all the time. from televanghelists who tell you that the only way to prove your love to god is to send them a lot of money to the church telling the middle ages peasants that it is god's will that they should suffer and die in abject poverty while their lords fatten in luxury. from inquisitors killing a whole bunch of witches to all those sects(freakin mormons) popping up all over the place.
since god didn't smote anyone of these, why do we assume god would have stopped anyone from writing in the bible something not coming from him?
8. jesus spoke in parables all the time. (he did have the kindness to warn before: "warning apostles, the following story is based on fictitious characters and should be taken as such. any similarities to real persons or events is purely coincidental"😉. why can't the flood story be a parable about "hey. don't be a jerk or i will fuk you up"


once you take these into account and really think about it, only then look "proofs" up. either supporting the flood or supporting evolution. it doesn't matter what conclusion you come to. as long as you reach there with an open mind. if you believe that god will hate you if you don't believe in something he may not have even wrote himself, you are doomed to failure from the start.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
just think about it. for argument sake. don't worry, i assume full responsibility for what might happen to your soul if you read the following.

please assume the following as true (i will draw a conclusion after)
1. There is a god. this shouldn't be hard as you already believe that.
2. god created everything, including humans.
3. god sent his son jesu ...[text shortened]... y not have even wrote himself, you are doomed to failure from the start.

You really don't get it do you? You have no understanding of what the Bible is for and what it means to all humans, yes even you.
"IF" you were to study the Bible and start to get a hint of what it is for, you would never make comments such as these.
I know you'll come back with some degrading remarks as usual but that only shows you have some underlying motive to try and make ones who do believe in God and his word the Bible, start to doubt their faith.
A little like Satan did in the Garden with Eve? Sound familiar?

Originally posted by galveston75
You really don't get it do you? You have no understanding of what the Bible is for and what it means to all humans, yes even you.
"IF" you were to study the Bible and start to get a hint of what it is for, you would never make comments such as these.
I know you'll come back with some degrading remarks as usual but that only shows you have some underl ...[text shortened]... tart to doubt their faith.
A little like Satan did in the Garden with Eve? Sound familiar?

You're avoiding his questions.
You do just as god did to Moses, give a explanation light, instead of going deep into the matters.
Zahlani is just a better christian than you are.

Originally posted by galveston75
You really don't get it do you? You have no understanding of what the Bible is for and what it means to all humans, yes even you.
"IF" you were to study the Bible and start to get a hint of what it is for, you would never make comments such as these.
I know you'll come back with some degrading remarks as usual but that only shows you have some underl ...[text shortened]... tart to doubt their faith.
A little like Satan did in the Garden with Eve? Sound familiar?

no i am done with the degrading remarks. you really think that god will smite you if you say "5 words from the bible are wrong". as in god has nothing better to do than kill you on the spot while a child rapist is allowed to repent and be absolved of his sins.

you have reached a spot where you cannot question your system of beliefs and you bend and distort all other things to fit your system. like pushing a cube through a circular hole.


i feel sorry for you. as i feel sorry for carrobie(but he is so abnoxious that it is less sorry more GTFO). as i feel sorry for one of Joseph or Jaywill(one of them is decent the other is not, i can't tell which. one is coherent the other is not. i am inclining to think joseph is the one i must be sorry for).