• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Another irrefutable proof that God created all things using mathematical induction. And a proof that The Bible is the word of God.

ratiocinator

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
SavedByTheLord said:
Bingo. You are a fulfilling machine.
Click to expand...
Unargued assertion fallacy.

SavedByTheLord said:
Where did the universe come from?
Click to expand...
As I already said, and you ignored, it might not have 'come from' anything. A cause or origin for space-time itself is nonsensical.

SavedByTheLord said:
If the explanation is the Bing Bang with or without inflation, what was there before that?
Click to expand...
As I already said, and you ignored, there might not have been a before, see above.

Yet again: ignoring answers you get and just repeating the questions makes you look dim.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
McBell said:
More falee accusations.
Click to expand...
There are inconsistencies in the radioactive dating results of many things. So isochron dating has been used. But even then, there are many large discrepancies. Why?

The inconsistencies in the dating of things and in all “clocks” used to set the age of things can be simply explained if some miraculous events occurred. These would be 6-day creation, the fall of man and the curse on creation and the worldwide flood about 4500 years ago.
 
ratiocinator

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
SavedByTheLord said:
There are inconsistencies in the radioactive dating results of many things. So isochron dating has been used. But even then, there are many large discrepancies. Why?
Click to expand...
Yet another change of subject because you can't address the point being made. Why do you always run away when challenged?

SavedByTheLord said:
The inconsistencies in the dating of things and in all “clocks” used to set the age of things can be simply explained if some miraculous events occurred.
Click to expand...
You appear to be calling your god a liar.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
I have and you just ignored them.
What do you think about the attack on Israel?
That fulfills many Biblical prophecies.
Click to expand...
No. I never have. You said that you have specific prophecies for claims. I think that you were mistaken at best. By the way. There are standards to be a True prophecy. For example Muslims have claims of prophecies as well. Yet you would not accept them. That is because they all fail the following list, except you would need to replace "Bible" with "Quran":

Criteria for a true prophecy[edit]​

For a statement to be Biblical foreknowledge, it must fit all of the five following criteria:

  1. It must be accurate. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not accurate, because knowledge (and thus foreknowledge) excludes inaccurate statements. TLDR: It's true.
  2. It must be in the Bible. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it is not in the Bible, because Biblical by definition foreknowledge can only come from the Bible itself, rather than modern reinterpretations of the text. TLDR: It's in plain words in the Bible.
  3. It must be precise and unambiguous. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if meaningless philosophical musings or multiple possible ideas could fulfill the foreknowledge, because ambiguity prevents one from knowing whether the foreknowledge was intentional rather than accidental. TLDR: Vague "predictions" don't count.
  4. It must be improbable. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of a pure guess, because foreknowledge requires a person to actually know something true, while a correct guess doesn't mean that the guesser knows anything. This also excludes contemporary beliefs that happened be true but were believed to be true without solid evidence. TLDR: Lucky guesses don't count.
  5. It must have been unknown. A statement cannot be Biblical foreknowledge if it reasonably could be the result of an educated guess based off contemporary knowledge, because foreknowledge requires a person to know a statement when it would have been impossible, outside of supernatural power, for that person to know it. TLDR: Ideas of the time don't count.
Show that the prophecies that you claim to exist meet those reasonable standards and you will have won the argument. If you cannot do that you have lost when it comes to others "fulfilling prophecies".
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
There are inconsistencies in the radioactive dating results of many things. So isochron dating has been used. But even then, there are many large discrepancies. Why?

The inconsistencies in the dating of things and in all “clocks” used to set the age of things can be simply explained if some miraculous events occurred. These would be 6-day creation, the fall of man and the curse on creation and the worldwide flood about 4500 years ago.
Click to expand...
No, that is not an explanation. It is a claim. You would still need to show how a miracle would reset all clocks so that they had the same date.

You probably do not realize this, but scientists are extremely skeptical When they get a date that matches what they expect to see they very often do not stop there. For example when it comes to dating they often use multiple tests. You would need to explain how tests using different radioactive elements, using different methodologies can come up with the same date.

If you say "God did it with a miracle" and since the dates support each other and the current theories you are only calling God a liar again.

Which is why I always am forced to ask you why you believe that God is a liar?
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
No, that is not an explanation. It is a claim. You would still need to show how a miracle would reset all clocks so that they had the same date.

You probably do not realize this, but scientists are extremely skeptical When they get a date that matches what they expect to see they very often do not stop there. For example when it comes to dating they often use multiple tests. You would need to explain how tests using different radioactive elements, using different methodologies can come up with the same date.

If you say "God did it with a miracle" and since the dates support each other and the current theories you are only calling God a liar again.

Which is why I always am forced to ask you why you believe that God is a liar?
Click to expand...
Actually the dates would not have to be all the same for the Bible to be true?
But the major inconsistencies in these clocks refute evolution and billions of years.

How come there is no calendar that goes back beyond 6000 years?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
Actually the dates would not have to be all the same for the Bible to be true?
Click to expand...

No, that does not follow. I can explain why they should be the same with radioactive clocks. You would need to have a full explanation, which would include mathematical formulas why they are the same with your God magic.
SavedByTheLord said:
But the major inconsistencies in these clocks refute evolution and billions of years.
Click to expand...

Really? I am unaware of such "major inconsistencies". You need to demonstrate that they exist using a valid source.
SavedByTheLord said:
How come there is no calendar that goes back beyond 6000 years?
Click to expand...
Who says that there isn't? When you form your questions like this you take on the burden of proof. You have what looks as if it might be a false assumption in your question. You now need to prove that there were no calendars before then, and the Bible does not count as a reliable source since that is what is being disputed.. Just as someone that asks you "Have you quit beating your wife yet?" takes on the burden of proof that you ever beat your wife your question puts the burden of proof upon you.

If you do not like that then learn how to ask questions properly.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
No, that does not follow. I can explain why they should be the same with radioactive clocks. You would need to have a full explanation, which would include mathematical formulas why they are the same with your God magic.


Really? I am unaware of such "major inconsistencies". You need to demonstrate that they exist using a valid source.

Who says that there isn't? When you form your questions like this you take on the burden of proof. You have what looks as if it might be a false assumption in your question. You now need to prove that there were no calendars before then, and the Bible does not count as a reliable source since that is what is being disputed.. Just as someone that asks you "Have you quit beating your wife yet?" takes on the burden of proof that you ever beat your wife your question puts the burden of proof upon you.

If you do not like that then learn how to ask questions properly.
Click to expand...
What is the oldest calendar year?
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
Subduction Zone said:
I am sorry, I do not understand your question.
Click to expand...
The Chinese calendar has a current year number of around 4720, the Hebrew calendar of around 5785. So both are less than 6000 years.
Why are there none older than that? Surely people have been smart enough to count years as it is important.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
SavedByTheLord said:
The Chinese calendar has a current year number of around 4720, the Hebrew calendar of around 5785. So both are less than 6000 years.
Why are there none older than that? Surely people have been smart enough to count years as it is important.
Click to expand...
You have a false assumption again. There are no calendars older than that in use today.

Here is a ten thousand year old one, though it is rather crude:

www.nationalgeographic.com

World's Oldest Calendar Discovered in U.K.

A series of large pits were dug by Mesolithic people to track the cycle of the moon.
www.nationalgeographic.com www.nationalgeographic.com

As to the more modern calendars supposedly starting from those dates: So what? Even if you are right it is not "evidence". Without some sort of testable model you do not have evidence. You only are going to have an ad hoc explanation.

You really should try to learn what evidence is and what evidence is reliable and what evidence is not.
 
SavedByTheLord

SavedByTheLord

Well-Known Member
McBell said:
Yes.
It had a picture of Jesus on it and creationists raved on and on about how it not only proved the Big Bang Theory and Evolution false, but also that it infallibly proved THE Word of God truer that toasted toad true because it fulfilled a bunch of Bible prophesies with exact date AND time.
Click to expand...
I was just pointing out the the Gregorian calendar was not started 1000s of years before Christ with the first year as 1.
It was started after Christ’s birth with that years as 1 AD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top