GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-24-2013, 06:11   #941
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
And you can create life? If it happened spontaneously it could surely be done by men couldn't it?

I had one professor with a doctorate in physiology. He was an atheist, but he understood how unlikely it was for life to have spontaneously . He said it is like throwing a jigsaw puzzle into the air and eventually it will assemble itself, but it is not that simple.

The "watchmaker" fallacy has been debunked over and over again, Vic. This puzzle analogy is just another flavor of that same flawed argument.
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 06:37   #942
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
And you can create life? If it happened spontaneously it could surely be done by men couldn't it?

I had one professor with a doctorate in physiology. He was an atheist, but he understood how unlikely it was for life to have spontaneously . He said it is like throwing a jigsaw puzzle into the air and eventually it will assemble itself, but it is not that simple.
Actually, it's more like throwing an unknown yet enormous number of jigsaw puzzles into the air in an enormous number of locations. Also, each piece that fits together is naturally attracted to fit together. Then each time a new piece fits in it stays in for for every subsequent toss until all the pieces are in place. Now you can go ahead and make your puzzle as complex as you like and it doesn't matter.

You should know by now why it's like that. It's been explained to you dozens of times but you obviously weren't paying attention.
Gunhaver is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 06:44   #943
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunhaver View Post
There comes a point where new stars don't form in any given sector of space because all of the hydrogen in that area has already gravitated into already formed stars. Sometimes a process progresses to a point where it can prevent previous processes from reoccurring. It's a bit like observing an environment where chlorine is only found combined with sodium in NaCl2 and proclaiming that chlorine can only be found combined with sodium in any imaginable environment... because that's all that's been observed. You need to keep looking rather than proclaim the possibility of supernatural intervention that has never been observed.

So what's more likely? That this is simply another process that we don't fully understand yet (just as the sun burning and revolving around the earth once was) or that some magical force that has never been observed is responsible?
Well, stars are a lot different than cells. Space, ingredients, temperature, and a few others. NaCl2 doesn't exist, Sodium Chloride is NaCl. But I get where you are going.

It's a little more than a process we don't understand, it's simply an unproven and poorly supported hypothesis. Relying on trillions and trillions of tries hoping that the improbable would have occurred at least once is a fantastic claim. Not any more than the claim that a deity did it mind you. The more you really consider each of the possibilities, the more you see the gaping holes in the suppositions. A firm belief in abiogenesis or ID is a matter of faith.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 02-24-2013 at 06:47..
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 06:50   #944
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
And you can create life? If it happened spontaneously it could surely be done by men couldn't it?
Sure it could. My question to you (and Cav if he doesn't feel like dodging difficult questions today) is where exactly do you get off proclaiming that this should have happened by now? Do you know they just cured type 1 diabetes in a dog? Yep, it took this damn long but it looks like they did it. Why didn't that happen sooner?

Because the discovery happened when our understanding of science progressed to a point where it could happen. How can you say it should have happened any sooner when you know absolutely nothing about curing diabetes?

What you're doing is a bit like calling an electrician over to wire up your new house because you have no ****ing clue how to do it yourself and then proclaiming that he sucks at his job because you wanted him to distribute power from the breaker box all throughout your house without using all that expensive wiring and he didn't know how to do that.


Man. That new 2100 Corvette will be badass machine for sure. 1000 pounds curb weight, antimatter engine, tirillium alloy wheels and it drives itself just by you thinking about where you want to go. Why can't I buy one now? GM really dropped the ball on that one huh?

Last edited by Gunhaver; 02-24-2013 at 06:57..
Gunhaver is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 06:58   #945
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunhaver View Post
Actually, it's more like throwing an unknown yet enormous number of jigsaw puzzles into the air in an enormous number of locations. Also, each piece that fits together is naturally attracted to fit together. Then each time a new piece fits in it stays in for for every subsequent toss until all the pieces are in place. Now you can go ahead and make your puzzle as complex as you like and it doesn't matter.

You should know by now why it's like that. It's been explained to you dozens of times but you obviously weren't paying attention.
The problem is that there is no attractive force pulling the pieces into place. The natural force would be diffusion. Where is the data supporting that, or is it a supernatural force? In observed science, cells currently must be made by other cells. It is an active process, requiring the expenditure of energy and putting all the pieces together.

Cells are not passively self sustaining, they require active and passive transport systems in the surface and inside the cell. Those active transport systems are not spontaneous, they are controlled in order to maintain homeostasis.


The abiogenesis and ID suppositions each have their gaping holes.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 02-24-2013 at 07:26..
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 07:28   #946
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Well, stars are a lot different than cells. Space, ingredients, temperature, and a few others. NaCl2 doesn't exist, Sodium Chloride is NaCl. But I get where you are going.

It's a little more than a process we don't understand, it's simply an unproven and poorly supported hypothesis. Relying on trillions and trillions of tries hoping that the improbable would have occurred at least once is a fantastic claim. Not any more than the claim that a deity did it mind you. The more you really consider each of the possibilities, the more you see the gaping holes in the suppositions. A firm belief in abiogenesis or ID is a matter of faith.
The NaCl2 thing was a typo but congrats on not using it to play dumb. Stars are indeed different than cells. Do you disagree with my statement that some natural processes progress to a point where previous processes are no longer observable? Will the fossil record ever be 100% complete considering the fact that 99.9% of the animals that have ever lived are now dead and gone and most have died under conditions that were not just right for fossilization?

Or I could just ask you the same question I asked Vic. You saw that one didn't you?
Gunhaver is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 07:49   #947
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Vic,

The guys standing on the other side of the coin from you keep throwing the charge of "Young Earth Creationist" out there.

Is that just BS, or do you actually believe that the Earth is roughly 6000 years old?

Just curious...
They throw out a lot of false charges. They feel more secure demonizing someone who believes in a sovereign God as insane and radical.

Personally I don't know how old the earth is. Even the evolutionists make a number of different claims as to age of the earth and the age if the remains of ancient critters.

One thing that I have as a foundation belief is that the Bible is the inspired word of God. This definitely rules out the spontaneous appearance of life. It also rules out evolution as the force behind the creation of man.

1. Evolution requires death. Man was created in the image of God and was intended to have eternal life. Evolution requires the death of the weakest to enhance the most adapted traits of man. We as a race are becoming weaker and more diseased. Most of us cannot even contain the wisdom teeth that were apparently a necessary part of our ancestors. I have heard of ancient axe head being found that weighed 30 lbs. How many of us could use a tool like that?

2. The answer the Bible gives is that man entered into sin which threw everything in the earthly creation out of whack and set our planet on course for death. If evolution is true then there was no Garden of Eden and no fall of man from sinless ness to sinfulness. If that is true there is no need of a Savior because a sinless state then becomes only an artificial concept. His death would then become moot because we could not be saved from our sin and return to our former sinless state. The earth could not be returned to its perfect absolutely gorgeous state if it never existed.

3. I choose to believe that I have purpose , a reason for existing in a more grand scheme of things than blind chance and circumstance . I desire the breadth of character displayed to us in the life of Jesus. I desire the absolute innocence that I believe was once possessed by man. I can't do that by believing the philosophies and thoughts put forth by those who hate the very mention or thought of a loving Creator God.

4. The Bible presents the philosophies and thoughts of satan as being worked out in his followers. The curtain is pulled aside to see them warring against God and their ultimate end. Good against evil, Morality against immorality. The Bible points out that Jesus is going to win. I would rather be on the winning side.

Hebrews 11:24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
Hebrews 11:25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
Hebrews 11:26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward.
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Vic Hays is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 07:52   #948
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunhaver View Post
Sure it could. My question to you (and Cav if he doesn't feel like dodging difficult questions today) is where exactly do you get off proclaiming that this should have happened by now? Do you know they just cured type 1 diabetes in a dog? Yep, it took this damn long but it looks like they did it. Why didn't that happen sooner?

Because the discovery happened when our understanding of science progressed to a point where it could happen. How can you say it should have happened any sooner when you know absolutely nothing about curing diabetes?

What you're doing is a bit like calling an electrician over to wire up your new house because you have no ****ing clue how to do it yourself and then proclaiming that he sucks at his job because you wanted him to distribute power from the breaker box all throughout your house without using all that expensive wiring and he didn't know how to do that.


Man. That new 2100 Corvette will be badass machine for sure. 1000 pounds curb weight, antimatter engine, tirillium alloy wheels and it drives itself just by you thinking about where you want to go. Why can't I buy one now? GM really dropped the ball on that one huh?
What an interesting post you have there.

Lets get right to your questions:

Where do I get off??
&
Why can't you buy something that doesn't exist?


Wow, those are deep. Like diving into a wading pool.

I'll let you answer your own rhetorical questions. But I did want to comment on your post. You've presented an illustrative moment.

I'm just the messenger, and it's a message you evidently don't like that causes you great distress. Dropping the F-bomb, little insults sprinkled about, it's cute.

You've had to imagine a few things you can't have. Proof of abiogenesis, convincing evidence, this mysterious supernatural force that pulls the elements of life together that overwhelms natural diffusion and now a corvette that you couldn't afford if it did exist. Maybe some day things will change and you can have one or more of those imagined things. Hope is a good thing, most of the time.

Your arguments are not much different than "God works in mysterious ways". In fact, they aren't different at all. There are gaping holes in both genesis of life suppositions, and each side seems to be deeply invested in their chosen theory being correct, after all, if it's not, and they are wrong on that one little tiny historical detail, then they will have A LOT of re-evaluation to do.

The interesting thing is that you are passionately invested in abiogenesis being correct. Passionate enough to lose your normal cheery disposition when it is questioned. It's almost the same reaction when a religious person hears blasphemy, well, not really almost, but I'm trying to be gentle with you.


Like I have been saying for a long time, it's not just the definitions, it's true in the spirit of the words too. Thanks for the demonstration. You've been useful today.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Cavalry Doc; 02-24-2013 at 07:54..
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 08:09   #949
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
They throw out a lot of false charges. They feel more secure demonizing someone who believes in a sovereign God as insane and radical.

Personally I don't know how old the earth is. Even the evolutionists make a number of different claims as to age of the earth and the age if the remains of ancient critters.

One thing that I have as a foundation belief is that the Bible is the inspired word of God. This definitely rules out the spontaneous appearance of life. It also rules out evolution as the force behind the creation of man.

1. Evolution requires death. Man was created in the image of God and was intended to have eternal life. Evolution requires the death of the weakest to enhance the most adapted traits of man. We as a race are becoming weaker and more diseased. Most of us cannot even contain the wisdom teeth that were apparently a necessary part of our ancestors. I have heard of ancient axe head being found that weighed 30 lbs. How many of us could use a tool like that?

2. The answer the Bible gives is that man entered into sin which threw everything in the earthly creation out of whack and set our planet on course for death. If evolution is true then there was no Garden of Eden and no fall of man from sinless ness to sinfulness. If that is true there is no need of a Savior because a sinless state then becomes only an artificial concept. His death would then become moot because we could not be saved from our sin and return to our former sinless state. The earth could not be returned to its perfect absolutely gorgeous state if it never existed.

3. I choose to believe that I have purpose , a reason for existing in a more grand scheme of things than blind chance and circumstance . I desire the breadth of character displayed to us in the life of Jesus. I desire the absolute innocence that I believe was once possessed by man. I can't do that by believing the philosophies and thoughts put forth by those who hate the very mention or thought of a loving Creator God.

4. The Bible presents the philosophies and thoughts of satan as being worked out in his followers. The curtain is pulled aside to see them warring against God and their ultimate end. Good against evil, Morality against immorality. The Bible points out that Jesus is going to win. I would rather be on the winning side.

Hebrews 11:24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
Hebrews 11:25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
Hebrews 11:26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward.
I was wondering. I haven't met anyone that actually thinks the world is 6000 years old, but it keeps being thrown around like it's a rampantly evident false belief by the atheists/anti-theists.

We do have different opinions on a few things. Evolution is more of a chance thing. A trait that might kill you right after reproducing the first time is not a desirable trait, but it can exist (See Salmon). I see both chaos and order in the system of life. At the cellular level, I see much more order than chaos. I can accept life evolving, whether that is a designed event, or random chance is obviously debatable.

As far as our species becoming more diseased, that's likely a factor of compassion. The sick are treated, and allowed to stick around much longer than biologically necessary. I'm not complaining mind you, allowing people to get old is a nice thing to do most of the time. Our weakness is likely because we live lives of pampered luxury. We aren't chasing down our food, carrying water, walking great distances to get things we need, tilling the earth by hand, fighting off predators and competitors.......

Anyway, thanks for answering the question. I had a feeling that was the case. I get a lot of baseless charges from the evangelical atheists too. They really hate blasphemers. I may not be convinced your beliefs are correct, but at least we can be polite about it.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 08:12   #950
Gunhaver
the wrong hands
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,736
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
What an interesting post you have there.

Lets get right to your questions:

Where do I get off??
&
Why can't you buy something that doesn't exist?


Wow, those are deep. Like diving into a wading pool.

I'll let you answer your own rhetorical questions. But I did want to comment on your post. You've presented an illustrative moment.

I'm just the messenger, and it's a message you evidently don't like that causes you great distress. Dropping the F-bomb, little insults sprinkled about, it's cute.

You've had to imagine a few things you can't have. Proof of abiogenesis, convincing evidence, this mysterious supernatural force that pulls the elements of life together that overwhelms natural diffusion and now a corvette that you couldn't afford if it did exist. Maybe some day things will change and you can have one or more of those imagined things. Hope is a good thing, most of the time.

Your arguments are not much different than "God works in mysterious ways". In fact, they aren't different at all. There are gaping holes in both genesis of life suppositions, and each side seems to be deeply invested in their chosen theory being correct, after all, if it's not, and they are wrong on that one little tiny historical detail, then they will have A LOT of re-evaluation to do.

The interesting thing is that you are passionately invested in abiogenesis being correct. Passionate enough to lose your normal cheery disposition when it is questioned. It's almost the same reaction when a religious person hears blasphemy, well, not really almost, but I'm trying to be gentle with you.


Like I have been saying for a long time, it's not just the definitions, it's true in the spirit of the words too. Thanks for the demonstration. You've been useful today.
Yes, I'm often too illustrative for my own good. Maybe I'll just stick to direct questions to you from now on since you'll happily take any opportunity to focus on anything but the main point.

Direct question: Do you think that the fact that the abiogenesis process cannot be currently explained means that it will never be explained?

They are working on it.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1978170520/
Gunhaver is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 08:30   #951
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunhaver View Post
Yes, I'm often too illustrative for my own good. Maybe I'll just stick to direct questions to you from now on since you'll happily take any opportunity to focus on anything but the main point.

Direct question: Do you think that the fact that the abiogenesis process cannot be currently explained means that it will never be explained?

They are working on it.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1978170520/
Lets answer that question with a less biased approach which will get you there.

Do I think that the fact that the process that led to the first living cell on Earth cannot be currently explained means that it will never be explained?

Not necessarily. It's possible that we (mankind) will discover the truth of the matter. We are talking about an unwitnessed event hundreds of millions of years ago, and the evidence trail is very cold, so that's not going to be easy. Some will see evidence that their chosen version of events is supported regardless of the evidence presented. If mankind creates life in a lab, it will prove that life can be made, but many will use that to argue that life could have happened on it's own too, much in the same way that creating some of the simpler building blocks for life are used now.

It's unfortunate that it is a wedge issue for so many people.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 08:49   #952
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,950
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
They throw out a lot of false charges. They feel more secure demonizing someone who believes in a sovereign God as insane and radical.

Personally I don't know how old the earth is. Even the evolutionists make a number of different claims as to age of the earth and the age if the remains of ancient critters.

One thing that I have as a foundation belief is that the Bible is the inspired word of God. This definitely rules out the spontaneous appearance of life. It also rules out evolution as the force behind the creation of man.

1. Evolution requires death. Man was created in the image of God and was intended to have eternal life. Evolution requires the death of the weakest to enhance the most adapted traits of man. We as a race are becoming weaker and more diseased. Most of us cannot even contain the wisdom teeth that were apparently a necessary part of our ancestors. I have heard of ancient axe head being found that weighed 30 lbs. How many of us could use a tool like that?

2. The answer the Bible gives is that man entered into sin which threw everything in the earthly creation out of whack and set our planet on course for death. If evolution is true then there was no Garden of Eden and no fall of man from sinless ness to sinfulness. If that is true there is no need of a Savior because a sinless state then becomes only an artificial concept. His death would then become moot because we could not be saved from our sin and return to our former sinless state. The earth could not be returned to its perfect absolutely gorgeous state if it never existed.

3. I choose to believe that I have purpose , a reason for existing in a more grand scheme of things than blind chance and circumstance . I desire the breadth of character displayed to us in the life of Jesus. I desire the absolute innocence that I believe was once possessed by man. I can't do that by believing the philosophies and thoughts put forth by those who hate the very mention or thought of a loving Creator God.

4. The Bible presents the philosophies and thoughts of satan as being worked out in his followers. The curtain is pulled aside to see them warring against God and their ultimate end. Good against evil, Morality against immorality. The Bible points out that Jesus is going to win. I would rather be on the winning side.

Hebrews 11:24 By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter;
Hebrews 11:25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
Hebrews 11:26 Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompense of the reward.
I appreciate the response to Calvary Doc's question. Not that it needs to be said, but I'll say it anyway... I welcome anybody to correct me if I misstate your position -- I assure you it was not done intentionally.

My understanding is that a fundamental Seventh Day Adventist belief is in a literal Creation week, a literal Flood, etc. Kingarthurhk cerntainly represented those views, but I recognize that he doesn't speak for you.

So while you don't claim to know the exact age of the earth, can we put some limits around what you could accept? Could you accept the earth being (in years old): 20,000? 100,000? A million? A billion? 4.5 billion?

It sounds like your objection to evolution is rooted in your interpretation of scripture. Is there any amount of evidence that could cause you to accept that animals (including humans) evolved from earlier, less complex life?

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 08:54   #953
hooligan74
Senior Member
 
hooligan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 2,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
...Personally I don't know how old the earth is. Even the evolutionists make a number of different claims as to age of the earth and the age if the remains of ancient critters...
I won't pretend to know what you believe, but there certainly ARE Christians who believe in the "young Earth" scenario (granted, I'm pretty sure they are hugely a minority):

http://www.christianpost.com/news/yo...istians-86624/

You say that you believe the Bible to be the "inspired word of God" - do you believe Genesis to state that God created the universe in 6 days, as we understand a day to be?

Last edited by hooligan74; 02-24-2013 at 08:55..
hooligan74 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 11:27   #954
Syclone538
Senior Member
 
Syclone538's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
I was wondering. I haven't met anyone that actually thinks the world is 6000 years old,
...
Two things here.

1 You don't know if you have because how rarely you claim to get into in depth discussions on people's faith in person.

2 I don't know if I have either because I've never asked any of the people that proselytize to me. I have no idea how common it is, but you can definitely find people online who believe that.
__________________
Some people want freedom, even for those they disagree with, and some don't.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Quote:
...
The constitution is not, nor was it meant to be absolutely literal.
...
Syclone538 is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 12:25   #955
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Quote:
Originally Posted by Syclone538 View Post
Two things here.

1 You don't know if you have because how rarely you claim to get into in depth discussions on people's faith in person.

2 I don't know if I have either because I've never asked any of the people that proselytize to me. I have no idea how common it is, but you can definitely find people online who believe that.
I guess I could rephrase that. I've never met anyone that voiced an opinion that the world was only 6000 years old.

I also don't get a lot of proselytizing from people, except on GTRI. I get a lot of it here.


I've not run into any here either. Someone said Kingarthur thinks that is true, next time I run into him on GTRI, I'll ask him. We've had a bit of a falling out over the gun manufacturers and distributors refusing to sell to government entities of any sort in states with restrictive gun laws for civilians.

http://www.thepoliceloophole.com/

I support the companies that support civilian gun ownership rights.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 15:08   #956
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan74 View Post
I won't pretend to know what you believe, but there certainly ARE Christians who believe in the "young Earth" scenario (granted, I'm pretty sure they are hugely a minority):

http://www.christianpost.com/news/yo...istians-86624/

You say that you believe the Bible to be the "inspired word of God" - do you believe Genesis to state that God created the universe in 6 days, as we understand a day to be?
A lot of people make the Bible say things that were not intended by the writers. The Bible does not say the universe was created in 6 days.

Creation week on the earth was 6 days plus the Sabbath. It is evident from the language that these days consisted of an evening and a morning in that order. These are literal days. The Seventh day Sabbath is a literal day commemorating creation.


Even so it was not necessary for God to create babies and have them grow up. He can create a bird flying in midair with all the accompanying dynamics. He could create the entire universe with the light in place if He chose to do so.

He is the creator of physics and is not bound by it.
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Vic Hays is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 15:18   #957
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtificialGrape View Post
I appreciate the response to Calvary Doc's question. Not that it needs to be said, but I'll say it anyway... I welcome anybody to correct me if I misstate your position -- I assure you it was not done intentionally.

My understanding is that a fundamental Seventh Day Adventist belief is in a literal Creation week, a literal Flood, etc. Kingarthurhk cerntainly represented those views, but I recognize that he doesn't speak for you.

So while you don't claim to know the exact age of the earth, can we put some limits around what you could accept? Could you accept the earth being (in years old): 20,000? 100,000? A million? A billion? 4.5 billion?

It sounds like your objection to evolution is rooted in your interpretation of scripture. Is there any amount of evidence that could cause you to accept that animals (including humans) evolved from earlier, less complex life?

-ArtificialGrape
Perhaps the earth itself is 4.5 billion years old, but the creation account of a literal week dates from approximately 6000 years by the genealogical records in the Bible. The Bible is not a science book. It states that God created everything, but it does not say how He did it.

Evolution is not a proven theory nor is abiogenesis that would have had to occur for evolution to be viable.

If I was around and observed the abiogenesis of life on earth, then I would probably concede that that is what happened, but even Adam did not witness his own creation or that of Eve. He had to take it on faith that God had created them.
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Vic Hays is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 15:40   #958
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,950
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
Even so it was not necessary for God to create babies and have them grow up. He can create a bird flying in midair with all the accompanying dynamics. He could create the entire universe with the light in place if He chose to do so.

He is the creator of physics and is not bound by it.
Gosse's Omphalos -- God created the universe with an appearance of age.

An omnipotent god could have created the universe including us with false memories last Thursday or 5 minutes ago. I fully concede that an omnipotent god could also be omnideceptive.

The argument can neither be proven, nor falsified, so it is best ignored.

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 16:37   #959
Cavalry Doc
MAJ (USA Ret.)
 
Cavalry Doc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Republic of Texas
Posts: 41,911


Anyone have any opinion on the Law of Biogenesis as described by Pasteur?

Seems like the concept of abiogenesis has been proven false at times in history.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
--Gunhaver
Don't let the guys quoted above contact your reps more than you.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Cavalry Doc is offline  
Old 02-24-2013, 16:52   #960
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,950
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Anyone have any opinion on the Law of Biogenesis as described by Pasteur?

Seems like the concept of abiogenesis has been proven false at times in history.
It's been awhile, but as I recall, Pasteur dealt with spontaneous generation, not what would be considered abiogenesis today.

An example of spontaneous generation would be maggots spontaneously generating out of rotting meat. Pasteur worked to dispel this belief.

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:31.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,483
406 Members
1,077 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42