Age of the earth

[The_Evelyonian]

Well if one doesn't believe in absolutes then no, they can't be absolutely sure of what they believe

"You can't be sure what you believe. For all you know, you may really believe that the moon is made of marshmallow whip and is carried across the sky by elephants."

Please, don't make such an absurd assertion again.

Neither, if the pothole was designed to fit the puddle. None of the water would overflow/ sometimes not fill the pothole perfectly. I don't see where you're going with this

Life adapts to its environment, not the other way around.

Design is talked about in Genesis.

Okay. Where does it say chance and design are the only options.

When you say 'chance?' Are you talking about things just randomly comming into existence without being desinged?

Well, you brought up chance. How do you define it?

Yes, I can't prove/dissprove God exists, but I have no reason to believe he doesn't and I already gave you some reasons for why I think he does.(they were how some things fit so perfectly together)

So, how does "some things fit so perfectly together" equal "god did it"?

Yeah I remember you explaining it. But when you say you're reasonably certain. That implies that you can't be absolutel sure, which implies that there's a chance what you believe can be wrong.

So what?

That's why I believe there's absolutes.

Because you don't like the idea that you could be wrong?

Without absolutes you can't be sure of anything because there's a chance everything you believe might not be true.

Again with "you don't know absolutely" equals "you don't know at all".

I'm really tired of having to explain this. In order to "know" something, you don't need a 100% certainty of it (something you've already said you agreed with).

No at times you, "don't have to be absolutely sure,"

As I said with the cancer doctor, if she told you that her tests showed with 99% accuracy that you had cancer, you wouldn't just dismiss her conclusion with "Oh, so you don't know if I have it at all, do you?".

I really don't understand why we're still going around and around and around over this. It's a meaningless point. If the only reason you're holding onto "absolute certainty" is because without it there's "a chance you might be wrong" then I have to ask: so what?

"A chance you might be wrong" does not equal "a probability that you are wrong".

Look at it this way:

If there are two explanations for a given phenomenon (let's call them A & B) and if all of the available evidence points to A, then it would be reasonable to say that A is most likely correct, would it not?

Granted, there's is the possibility that explanation A could be wrong. However, the more evidence that can be shown to support A, the smaller that chance becomes. In fact, it can reach a point where A is supported so strongly by evidence, experiment, etc. that the chance of it being wrong is effectively zero. The only reason we don't say that chance of it being wrong is zero is because you always leave open the chance you could be wrong, no matter how well supported your conclusions are. To do otherwise is to cut yourself off from new discoveries. As I said, at that point you've left the realm of inquiry and entered the realm of dogma.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Yes everything and noIhaven't read the full thing. Why have you?

I suggest you read the Bible cover to cover and THEN say you agree with everything in it. If you don't know what is written in a book, how can you say you agree with it completely?

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Eve wasn't ignorant. She knew eating from the tree was wrong.

She did not know what 'wrong' was as she had not yet eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Yes everything and noIhaven't read the full thing. Why have you?

I have, many times. As both a Christian and a Deist.

And I find it amazing that one would so vehemently defend a literalistic interpretation of a book they have not even read.

 

[Vadergirl123]

And I find it amazing that one would so vehemently defend a literalistic interpretation of a book they have not even read.

I've read most of it. But not EVERY single word. I haven't read all of Leviticus and Deuteronomy and I haven't read all the prophets yet.

 

[Vadergirl123]

She did not know what 'wrong' was as she had not yet eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

She knew it was something God didn't want her to do. If she hadn't believed that she woudl've eaten the fruit without Satan convincing her to.

 

[Me Myself]

She knew it was something God didn't want her to do.

She didn´t know that defying God was wrong, and God knew that she didnñt know. Neither did she know that it was good following him, because she didn´t knew right and wrong.

 

[The Neo Nerd]

Hmm I think I see your point, but where do you get these "laws of logic?"

Is that you William?

 

[Vadergirl123]

" Life adapts to its environment, not the other way around.

Why did you use a pothole example, I don't understand how that shows life adapts to its environment? Why couldn't life have been created/designed to adapt to it's environment?

" Okay. Where does it say chance and design are the only options.

So I was reading back over the thread and I don't think I was thinking of "chance" in the same way you were. I thought of the word chance to mean something that suddenly appears." However something could be designed and suddenly appear, which would make only one option not two, so my bad. I should've been more specific and said design and something infinite are the only two options. And again Design is in Genesis, and something infinite would be God( Revelation 1:8)

" Well, you brought up chance. How do you define it?

I would define it as something randomly comming into existence without being designed.

" So, how does "some things fit so perfectly together" equal "god did it"?

Well if something fits perfetcly it means a designer did it, and for someone to design the whole universe would be quite a monstrous task. And God says he created the world.

" Again with "you don't know absolutely" equals "you don't know at all".

I'm not saying you, "Don't know at all." I'm saying you can't be absolutely sure. My whole point with the absolutes was that someone can't be absolutely sure of the world being 4.5 billion years old, and one also can't point to science as "proof" because there's always the chance that it's wrong.

" As I said with the cancer doctor, if she told you that her tests showed with 99% accuracy that you had cancer, you wouldn't just dismiss her conclusion with "Oh, so you don't know if I have it at all, do you?".

I already said I wouldn't dismiss it, but I also wouldn't be shocked if it turned out she was wrong.

" If there are two explanations for a given phenomenon (let's call them A & B) and if all of the available evidence points to A, then it would be reasonable to say that A is most likely correct, would it not?

Yes it would, however if you have evidence that points to both possibly being true(such as a young earth and an old earth) then you can't reasonably say A is most likely correct.

 

[Vadergirl123]

She didn´t know that defying God was wrong, and God knew that she didnñt know. Neither did she know that it was good following him, because she didn´t knew right and wrong.

She knew she shouldn't do it. She even told Satan(Genesis 3:2-3) And it says in Genesis 3:6 "When the woman saw that the tree was ....pleasant to the eyes...a tree to be desired to make one wise...she took of the fuit and did eat." Eve was being greedy not ignorant. She wanted to be "as gods"(vs 5)
Also if God hadn't wanted her to "know" not to eat of thetree he wouldn't have told her not to eat it.

 

[Vadergirl123]

If you don't know what is written in a book, how can you say you agree with it completely?

I do know what's written in it. I just haven't read every single word in it yet, but I have read most of it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

She knew she shouldn't do it. She even told Satan(Genesis 3:2-3) ...

Where do you find 'Satan' referenced in Genesis 3?

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Eve wasn't ignorant. She knew eating from the tree was wrong. God's instructions weren't complicated. She just got greedy. No I don't think it's fair for all women to be punished becuase of her. I also don't think it's fair that Jesus chose to die for everyone.

Your comparison is utterly without merit.

What I think is fair doesn't matter, since it's Gods choice.

Whoa whoa! So God can do anything he damn well pleases. Why does he/she need you to worship him/her then? Also, if you give up your sense of right and wrong in favor of a higher authority, then I don't believe you have any morals or sense of ethics at all.

And it's good thing it's not up to me. Because I wouldn't let my son die a tortorous death for a bunch of people especially if some of them didn't even believe I existed or hated me, or chose to worship something else besides me, and if I knew that even after I died some of them would still refuse to believe in me.

Ah but then you are not god. How do you know Jesus really felt any pain at all? he was god after all. What if he was just acting?

 

[Me Myself]

She knew she shouldn't do it. She even told Satan(Genesis 3:2-3) And it says in Genesis 3:6 "When the woman saw that the tree was ....pleasant to the eyes...a tree to be desired to make one wise...she took of the fuit and did eat." Eve was being greedy not ignorant. She wanted to be "as gods"(vs 5)

If she wasn´t ignorant then the bible is wrong when it says she only found out about right and wrong after eating the fruit. Each time you argue that she know she was doing wrong you go against the written story.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

I do know what's written in it. I just haven't read every single word in it yet, but I have read most of it.

Okay. But you stated previously that you agree with EVERYTHING in the Bible, yet you say you don't think it is fair that all women must suffer because of the actions of one woman. Which is it? Do you agree with it completely or not? If not, what is causing you to cherry-pick the parts that you do agree with?

BTW, The bible condones slavery, stoning your kids to death and all other manner of horrific things. Do you agree with all of these completely as well?

 

[Me Myself]

Bible also fond of Genocide and talking donkeys. And a saint who curses children so 42 of them die by being mauled by two bears because they dared call him "baldy"

 

[Heathen Hammer]

She knew it was something God didn't want her to do. If she hadn't believed that she woudl've eaten the fruit without Satan convincing her to.

But the idea God didn't want her to do it was over-ruled when the serpent [not Satan] suggested she do eat it. Essentially we are dealing with a child's mind, here. Eve might have had some adult form but she had no education, no culture, and no-one else to learn from. And she was kept deliberately ignorant of the concepts of Good and Evil.

Therefore, no, she had no idea what disobedience was, and the decision was made in ignorance.

 

[Vadergirl123]

Your comparison is utterly without merit.

I was trying to show that God has a different view of "what's fair" than I do. And my opinion of what's fair shouldn't matter.

Whoa whoa! So God can do anything he pleases.

Yep

Why does he/she need you to worship him/her then?

He doesn't need me to worship him.

Also, if you give up your sense of right and wrong in favor of a higher authority, then I don't believe you have any morals or sense of ethics at all.

Apart from God not really no I wouldn't have a sense of what's right or wrong. I'd just do whatever I wanted, and there'd be nothing wrong with me doing that.

Ah but then you are not god. How do you know Jesus really felt any pain at all? he was god after all. What if he was just acting?

No I'm not God(thank goodness) he was 100% man and 100% God so yes he felt pain. Also if he wasn't going to feel any pain. Why woudl he have prayed to his father to take the, "cup from him." (Mark 14:36)I mean if it was going to be painless then that would've been unnecessary.

 

[Vadergirl123]

If she wasn´t ignorant then the bible is wrong when it says she only found out about right and wrong after eating the fruit. Each time you argue that she know she was doing wrong you go against the written story.

Where does the bible say that they, "found out was right and wrong after eating the fruit?" Also what do you mean when you say, "Ignorant"

 

[Vadergirl123]

Okay. But you stated previously that you agree with EVERYTHING in the Bible, yet you say you don't think it is fair that all women must suffer because of the actions of one woman. Which is it? Do you agree with it completely or not? If not, what is causing you to cherry-pick the parts that you do agree with?

BTW, The bible condones slavery, stoning your kids to death and all other manner of horrific things. Do you agree with all of these completely as well?

I agree with it completely, and I agree with what God did....The bible doesn't condone slavery. I already posted something about that. Neither does it condone stoning kids.