About fossils -- would you say this is true?

[exchemist]

JESUS CHRIST! Jesus treated as historical fact the accounts in the Old Testament, which religious and atheistic skeptics think are unbelievable mythology. Such historical accounts include Adam and Eve as the first married couple (Matthew 19:3–6; Mark 10:3–9), Abel as the first prophet who was killed (Luke 11:50–51), Noah and the Flood (Matthew 24:38–39), Moses and the serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14), Moses and the manna from heaven to feed the Israelites in the wilderness (John 6:32–33, 49), the experiences of Lot and his wife (Luke 17:28–32), the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah (Matthew 10:15), the miracles of Elijah (Luke 4:25–27), and Jonah and the big fish (Matthew 12:40–41). Jesus did not allegorize these accounts but took them as straightforward history, describing events that occurred just as the Old Testament describes. Jesus used these accounts to teach His disciples that the events of His death, Resurrection, and Second Coming would likewise certainly happen in time-space reality.

That is highly debatable but, leaving that aside, Jesus Christ is a figure in, er, the bible. We only know of his teaching from the accounts in the bible.

So this is entirely circular. If the bible does not always accurately record events, then you obviously can’t rely on what it says as proof that it is accurate!

 

[exchemist]

You need Bible knowledge rather than "scientifically" sounding excuses.

Excuses? No. Objective evidence is what science relies on. And the evidence of science supports the view of early church fathers e.g. Origen, that parts of the Old Testaments should be read allegorically rather than literally. That has been the view of the church since long before modern science. It was only in the c.19th that some extreme sects arose which, very naively and arbitrarily, decided every word of the bible must be taken literally.

 

[exchemist]

And as I've so often had said to me and now I say to you ----- "So, you believe everything you read on Wikipedia?" They may present an explanation; however, it isn't the ONLY one.

The Wiki article on this subject is well researched and referenced. The c19th geologists who first encountered them were able to explain them without difficulty. Many of them were religious believers and they saw no issue. The entire “polystrate” notion is a scam.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You need Bible knowledge rather than "scientifically" sounding excuses.

No, we do not.

"Bible knowledge" says that God permitted Satan to kill all 10 of Job's children -- but that, hey, that's okay because Job got 10 more. Yeah, those first 10 weren't real lives -- just a number of kids. Property. Lose some, get some. That God, if it were to really exist, is utterly depraved.

 

[wellwisher]

That is highly debatable but, leaving that aside, Jesus Christ is a figure in, er, the bible. We only know of his teaching from the accounts in the bible.

So this is entirely circular. If the bible does not always accurately record events, then you obviously can’t rely on what it says as proof that it is accurate!

The way I approach this is to combine science with religion to see where they overlap. Creation places the age of the universe at about 6000 years. I asked myself, what science proven discoveries occurred in that carbon dated time scale? The answer is the invention of written language and the rise of stable civilization.

I can see evolution by natural selection for humans, happening up to the rise of civilization and written language. Once civilization forms and persists, man made environments appear, and man made selections start to add a wild card to natural selection for humans.

There must have been was an update in the human brain's operating system about 6000 years ago, since human behavior changes very drastically. In a sense, a new type of human appears who was no longer fully a part of nature; paradise. This new human became more civilized and willful. It is like a clock starts anew.

For example, natural selection would pick the most fit under various circumstances. How did the idea of blood lines ever form, where the selected people, are already selected ahead of time, detached from environmental circumstances? This is not natural selection, but appears to be a unique man made selection process, or some other form of modern human selection process; needs of collectivism. It also reflects a more open vision of the future, instead of living in the present like a natural animal. It was a remarkable update.

The bible to me is like an ancient diary of those new human early days, which were often explained using the thinking of that time; lacks 20/20 insight back then. But this is still valuable, since it gives us clues as to how we got here and how the modern brain's operating system is layered; science from religion.

 

[Little Nipper]

No, we do not.

"Bible knowledge" says that God permitted Satan to kill all 10 of Job's children -- but that, hey, that's okay because Job got 10 more. Yeah, those first 10 weren't real lives -- just a number of kids. Property. Lose some, get some. That God, if it were to really exist, is utterly depraved.

So, you don't expect to die? The fact that you will one day die makes GOD depraved? Will you die because GOD is depraved or because you are?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe GOD's Word. I'm certainly not the one concluding that GOD is a liar. Men of science developed their own labels over time. They were and are an inventive way of establishing a sort of library, but it's not written in stone as some would have us think.

No one is calling God a liar here except for you. It is a pity that you do not understand that. We know that there was no Flood because God is not a liar.

If you were not so afraid you could learn a little science. You would see why almost all Christian scientists know that the Flood never happened. And since this include people that are not experts in the field this is an amazing amount of agreement among scientists.

The Bible may be "God's word", I disagree with that, but it is also blasphemy to read it overly literally as you do.

Do you believe that the Earth is Flat?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The way I approach this is to combine science with religion to see where they overlap. Creation places the age of the universe at about 6000 years. I asked myself, what science proven discoveries occurred in that carbon dated time scale? The answer is the invention of written language and the rise of stable civilization.

I can see evolution by natural selection for humans, happening up to the rise of civilization and written language. Once civilization forms and persists, man made environments appear, and man made selections start to add a wild card to natural selection for humans.

There must have been was an update in the human brain's operating system about 6000 years ago, since human behavior changes very drastically. In a sense, a new type of human appears who was no longer fully a part of nature; paradise. This new human became more civilized and willful. It is like a clock starts anew.

For example, natural selection would pick the most fit under various circumstances. How did the idea of blood lines ever form, where the selected people, are already selected ahead of time, detached from environmental circumstances? This is not natural selection, but appears to be a unique man made selection process, or some other form of modern human selection process; needs of collectivism. It also reflects a more open vision of the future, instead of living in the present like a natural animal. It was a remarkable update.

The bible to me is like an ancient diary of those new human early days, which were often explained using the thinking of that time; lacks 20/20 insight back then. But this is still valuable, since it gives us clues as to how we got here and how the modern brain's operating system is layered; science from religion.

There is no evidence of a "sudden "change' in human behavior. There is no line of "here is where we became fully modern humans".

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So, you don't expect to die? The fact that you will one day die makes GOD depraved? Will you die because GOD is depraved or because you are?

Way to completely miss the point. I shall have to assume that was deliberate, an attempt to mis-direct. Typical.

 

[shunyadragon]

The FLOOD left geological layers of minerals and rocks ---- as well as, the fossils that come to be only by quick burial. The FLOOD resulted in the bending and lifting of the geological layers. A polystrate fossil is a fossil of a single organism (such as a tree trunk) that extends through more than one geological stratum. The word polystrate is not a standard geological term because evolutionists and uniformitarians are rather embarrassed by such fossils.

Based on pure physics it is impossible for any flood to cause the 'bending and lifting as well as the amount of energy involved in the vast metamorphism and volcanism in thousands of layers.

The geologic layers of the earth are in places thousands of feet thick deposited in the manner you see today. As far as your mention of a flood? in the geologic history of the earth.was 2.5 and 4.0 billion years ago when life as we know it was not around. We have complete strata for millions of years with no record of a world or regional flood.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So, you don't expect to die? The fact that you will one day die makes GOD depraved? Will you die because GOD is depraved or because you are?

Oh my! I have to agree with @Evangelicalhumanist. Let's put you in God's place. You have a close friend and employee. He worships you. You are talking with someone that is a business rival and you decide to have a bet with him. He tells his rival that he can do anything that he wants to to your friend and employee, and that friend will still be his friend. So he ruins him financially. Causes all of his kids to commit suicide. Gives hi all sorts of diseases. And then when your friend finds out about your bet you chew him out for not being a good enough friend. Are you the bad guy here or not?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Based on pure physics it is impossible for any flood to cause the 'bending and lifting as well as the amount of energy involved in the vast metamorphism and volcanism in thousands of layers.

The geologic layers of the earth are in places thousands of feet thick deposited in the manner you see today. As far as your mention of a flood? in the geologic history of the earth.was 2.5 and 4.0 billion years ago when life as we know it was not around. We have complete strata for millions of years with no record of a world or regional flood.

Let's not forget the various heat problems. Flood believers try to go beyond cooking Noah and company. Where did the water come from? The atmosphere can only hold a small amount. Less than a foot if I remember correctly. I have heard that them try to claim that it came came from space and deep underground. Both of those sources end up with the water being in the form of live steam by the time it gets to the Earth's surface.

Then there is the rapid plate tectonics that some have proposed. That too would liberate an incredibly amount of heat. Friction, new magma at the mid-oceanic rifts, that too would heat the oceans to boiling and beyond. The rate of heat release would be over ten million times the current rate. Then they try to claim that all sedimentary rocks of Cretaceous and earlier were formed then. That too releases heat. Normally, since the formation of limestone is very very slow we do not need to worry about the exothermic reaction that forms calcite. Raise that rate by over a factor of a hundred million and you once again have a huge heat problem.

I have heard that even the "scientists" at AiG have openly admitted that they have no answer to the heat problems.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There is no evidence of a "sudden "change' in human behavior. There is no line of "here is where we became fully modern humans".

And writing is just another invention -- and something we do know is that in humans, invention is cumulative. lt picks up speed as new knoweldge is added to old. It's interesting to note that the first transistor (basic to all of our modern electronic wonders) was successfully demonstrated only 3 months and 8 days before I was born.

 

[Little Nipper]

No one is calling God a liar here except for you. It is a pity that you do not understand that. We know that there was no Flood because God is not a liar.

Matthew 24:36-41 Jesus the CHRIST speaking to HIS disciples:

36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 As it was in the days of NOAH, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the FLOOD, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day NOAH entered the ARK; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the FLOOD came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.​

42 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 43 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.
45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Peter 3:3-4 (Pronounces that YOU are among the scoffers who were to come in the last days.)

​

1 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was DELUGED and DESTROYED. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.

If you were not so afraid you could learn a little science. You would see why almost all Christian scientists know that the Flood never happened. And since this include people that are not experts in the field this is an amazing amount of agreement among scientists.

You don't uphold science, but thories. The scientists that are in "agreement" reject everyone else who disagrees with their assessment.

The Bible may be "God's word", I disagree with that, but it is also blasphemy to read it overly literally as you do.

Nothing the Bible reveals from GOD is blasphemy In Mark 3:29 Jesus says, “Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.” Matthew's account adds that even blasphemy against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matthew 12:31–32)

Do you believe that the Earth is Flat?

The first line of Isaiah 40:22 reads, “It is HE [GOD] who sits above the circle of the earth.” Some have argued from this that Scripture teaches the earth to be a flat disc, rather than a globe. However, even if the original Hebrew is correctly understood to refer to a circle, this doesn’t necessarily indicate something flat; a sphere viewed in space appears as a circle from whatever direction it is viewed. Moreover, there is good reason to regard that the word translated ‘circle’ might be better translated ‘sphere’.

I believe the earth is spherical.

 

[Mock Turtle]

No, it came from my own mind. I am an independent thinker. Reputable scientists are open to research and not close minded to perceptions that undermine their own research. But I will tell you that the fossils found are generally more robust and larger then the skeletons of today's creatures. And this would imply STRONGER and longer lives than anything we witness today. And for me that reveals that nature is devolving, more sickly, and physically inferior to what it once was. You are the one with tunnel vision because you've missed so much listening to the dissertations of somewhat clueless agnostics.

Hardly. I do have respect for the vast majority of scientists who would laugh at your beliefs. Given these beliefs are incompatible with the evidence that they would recognise as truthfully representing reality with our present knowledge. And such never likely to backslide into beliefs like yours. It's rather amazing that some of you expect to find evidence as to your beliefs, and relying on science no doubt to do so, but will reject that evidence that goes against your set beliefs even though coming from the same science.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Matthew 24:36-41 Jesus the CHRIST speaking to HIS disciples:

36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 As it was in the days of NOAH, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the FLOOD, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day NOAH entered the ARK; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the FLOOD came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.​

42 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 43 But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into. 44 So you also must be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.
45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. 48 But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, ‘My master is staying away a long time,’ 49 and he then begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. 51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Peter 3:3-4 (Pronounces that YOU are among the scoffers who were to come in the last days.)

​

No, you are just abusing the Bible by being overly literal again. Didn't you know that Jesus taught using literary tools very frequently? If I tell someone that a lady is "As old as the hills' am I lying? No I am using a literary tool. Referring to "in the days of Noah" only needs to be a general reference to another time of troubles. That does not support the myth of the Flood. Why are you now claiming that Jesus was just an ordinary man?

1 Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was DELUGED and DESTROYED. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.


You don't uphold science, but thories. The scientists that are in "agreement" reject everyone else who disagrees with their assessment.

Again, literary tools. And you have no idea what science is. Science is a problem solving method. Nor do you understand the word "theory" In the sciences a scientific theory is at the top of the hierarchy. Theories, if anything, outrank laws.

Nothing the Bible reveals from GOD is blasphemy In Mark 3:29 Jesus says, “Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.” Matthew's account adds that even blasphemy against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (Matthew 12:31–32)

The first line of Isaiah 40:22 reads, “It is HE [GOD] who sits above the circle of the earth.” Some have argued from this that Scripture teaches the earth to be a flat disc, rather than a globe. However, even if the original Hebrew is correctly understood to refer to a circle, this doesn’t necessarily indicate something flat; a sphere viewed in space appears as a circle from whatever direction it is viewed. Moreover, there is good reason to regard that the word translated ‘circle’ might be better translated ‘sphere’.

No. Your translation is very very wrong. The specific Hebrew word (chug or some variant of it. not an actual "ch" sound, the best word that describes that letter is "phlegm) used was that for a circle inscribed with a compass. Circles are round. But guess what? They are flat. There was no Hebrew word for "sphere" but there was one for a ball. That word was not used. If you translate that literally, as you have been doing with Genesis, then it describes God above a Flat earth. There are other verses as well, and they always make more sense as flat earth verses. For example when Satan took Jesus to a high mountain so that they could see all of the Earth. You can only do that on a Flat Earth. Even from the top of the tallest mountain you can only see about 1% of the earth at the most. The Bible only describes the Earth as flat in word and deed.


And you do not seem to understand. Your misinterpretation is blasphemy. You keep claiming that God is a liar. You may not understand how, but that is what you are doing. Just as it would be blasphemy to insist that the Earth is flat because if one interprets the Bible literally and all of the evidence says otherwise it is the same when one interprets Genesis literally and claims that those myths are true when all of the evidence says otherwise.

I believe the earth is spherical.

Then you are not being consistent. If you are willing to change the translation of one of the flattest flat Earth verses in the Bible then you should not have a problem with changing your interpretation of the myths of Genesis. They still work as morality tales. They do not work as actual events. The evidence is clear that they never happened.

 

[Little Nipper]

No, you are just abusing the Bible by being overly literal again. Didn't you know that Jesus taught using literary tools very frequently? If I tell someone that a lady is "As old as the hills' am I lying? No I am using a literary tool. Referring to "in the days of Noah" only needs to be a general reference to another time of troubles. That does not support the myth of the Flood. Why are you now claiming that Jesus was just an ordinary man?


Again, literary tools. And you have no idea what science is. Science is a problem solving method. Nor do you understand the word "theory" In the sciences a scientific theory is at the top of the hierarchy. Theories, if anything, outrank laws

No. Your translation is very very wrong. The specific Hebrew word (chug or some variant of it. not an actual "ch" sound, the best word that describes that letter is "phlegm) used was that for a circle inscribed with a compass. Circles are round. But guess what? They are flat. There was no Hebrew word for "sphere" but there was one for a ball. That word was not used. If you translate that literally, as you have been doing with Genesis, then it describes God above a Flat earth. There are other verses as well, and they always make more sense as flat earth verses. For example when Satan took Jesus to a high mountain so that they could see all of the Earth. You can only do that on a Flat Earth. Even from the top of the tallest mountain you can only see about 1% of the earth at the most. The Bible only describes the Earth as flat in word and deed.


And you do not seem to understand. Your misinterpretation is blasphemy. You keep claiming that God is a liar. You may not understand how, but that is what you are doing. Just as it would be blasphemy to insist that the Earth is flat because if one interprets the Bible literally and all of the evidence says otherwise it is the same when one interprets Genesis literally and claims that those myths are true when all of the evidence says otherwise.



Then you are not being consistent. If you are willing to change the translation of one of the flattest flat Earth verses in the Bible then you should not have a problem with changing your interpretation of the myths of Genesis. They still work as morality tales. They do not work as actual events. The evidence is clear that they never happened.

I'm the CHRISTIAN and you are not. If you are willing to discuss things with me then you must be willing to accept the FACT that I believe in GOD and that HIS WORD is inerrant and YOU clearly do not. What you wish to believe is of no consequence to me. If you have a question, I will politely provide you with a biblical answer. If I have a quest for you, you may answer if you care to; otherwise, I will not be communicating with you. The HOLY SPIRIT helps me with my biblical understanding and clearly HE doesn't communicate with you at this time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm the CHRISTIAN and you are not. If you are willing to discuss things with me then you must be willing to accept the FACT that I believe in GOD and that HIS WORD is inerrant and YOU clearly do not. What you wish to believe is of no consequence to me. If you have a question, I will politely provide you with a biblical answer. If I have a quest for you, you may answer if you care to; otherwise, I will not be communicating with you. The HOLY SPIRIT helps me with my biblical understanding and clearly HE doesn't communicate with you at this time.

I was a Christian, and like most Christians in the world today did not believe the myths of Genesis. I know that you believe that the Bible is his word, that belief is actually a breaking of : "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under earth". You are making an idol of the Bible. And you may only think that the Holy Spirit helps you. Guess what? There are all sorts of people that you would agree were wrong that felt the same way that you do. They thought that they were guided by the Holy Spirit as well. So do not take offense when I explain to you how your misinterpretations are blasphemy.

This is the clear point that you cannot understand. Just as the Earth is not Flat and it would be blasphemy to interpret the Bible as advocating for that, the stories of Genesis never occurred and it would be blasphemy to interpret the Bible as implying that they are factual. They work as morality tales. They are useful in instruction in the right way to live. That satisfies: "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,"

 

[Little Nipper]

Hardly. I do have respect for the vast majority of scientists who would laugh at your beliefs. Given these beliefs are incompatible with the evidence that they would recognise as truthfully representing reality with our present knowledge. And such never likely to backslide into beliefs like yours. It's rather amazing that some of you expect to find evidence as to your beliefs, and relying on science no doubt to do so, but will reject that evidence that goes against your set beliefs even though coming from the same science.

That road would seem to go both ways, but evolutionists do not capitulate, so why should creationists?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That road would seem to go both ways, but evolutionists do not capitulate, so why should creationists?

Because we can show that evolution is a fact. Creationists do not even have any scientific evidence for their beliefs.

Just as the concept of gravity is a scientific concept and can be taught in schools as a result, evolution too is a purely scientific concept and can be taught in schools. Since there is no scientific evidence for creationism it is a purely religious idea, and a demonstrably wrong one at that, so it cannot be taught in public schools legallly.