Evidence for and against young earth creationism.

[Reggie Miller]

"...Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check..."James 3:2 Not me!

Well, I guess now you know I can't keep my body in check.

 

[Brian Schuh]

So god is fickle...?

...or is he a trickster or con-artist?

Either way, you are not painting good picture of God.

No. I am realistic. One can learn about God from looking at this world He created. There is a lot of good in the world but a lot of evil too.

At least I don't picture Him as a psychopath who can't wait to throw people into eternal hellfire for not believing in Jesus like many Xtians seem to believe.

I am realistic. By looking at this world, one can see that God is capable of good and evil.

 

[gnostic]

No. I am realistic. One can learn about God from looking at this world He created.

Actually you are simply projecting your belief when you look at the world. And it is a biased view, hardly objective, and certainly not realistic.

I am realistic. By looking at this world, one can see that God is capable of good and evil.

If God does exist..and I am stressing on the "does"...he is not worthy at all.

To give you an example:

A God who tell Abraham to go and sacrifice his son, just to test Abraham's faith and to see if the father will kill his son because he ordered it, is not what I called a "good" god, even though God did stop the sacrifice at the last moment.

That God stop the sacrifice is not the point. The point is that he gave the order in the first place, showed that God is more like the trickster.

The funny thing is that Christians today blame Satan being evil personification - the Devil, father of lies, the trickster.

But who is the trickster in the Abraham-Isaac story?

God is the trickster.

And what about what happened in JOB. Christians blamed Satan, but on whose order did Satan followed? God.

God is much as responsible for Job's suffering and death of Job's first group of children.

And why did God allow this happened? To test Job's faith and loyalty on a wager with Satan...a bloody wager.

If this story is true, then God is a f###-up sociopath tyrant: petty, cruel and arrogant. And when God bother to show up to reply to Job, he reveal more of his arrogant personality. There is nothing positive about God in this story; God is more of the villain than Satan.

Again, for me, God is not the sort of god that would consider to be worthy of respect and worship.

Do you want another example?

How about when Samuel, the spoken-person for God, told King Saul to attack the Amalekites and kill every man, woman and child (as well as any animal these people kept)?

Do you remember in Exodus 20, one of the commandments, was not to worship other gods or idols?

In it, it state that the children cannot inherit the sin of the father. But in the story with Saul and the Amalekites, the attack upon is for what the Amalekites did to Moses and the Israelites.

2 Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did in opposing the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt..."

Here, it revealed that God holding grudges for what happened centuries ago, not by Saul's Amalekite contemporaries did. I don't see the war to be justified. Why would God have people killed for action that happened centuries ago before Saul?

 

[Brian Schuh]

Actually you are simply projecting your belief when you look at the world. And it is a biased view, hardly objective, and certainly not realistic.

If God does exist..and I am stressing on the "does"...he is not worthy at all.

To give you an example:

A God who tell Abraham to go and sacrifice his son, just to test Abraham's faith and to see if the father will kill his son because he ordered it, is not what I called a "good" god, even though God did stop the sacrifice at the last moment.

That God stop the sacrifice is not the point. The point is that he gave the order in the first place, showed that God is more like the trickster.

The funny thing is that Christians today blame Satan being evil personification - the Devil, father of lies, the trickster.

But who is the trickster in the Abraham-Isaac story?

God is the trickster.

And what about what happened in JOB. Christians blamed Satan, but on whose order did Satan followed? God.

God is much as responsible for Job's suffering and death of Job's first group of children.

And why did God allow this happened? To test Job's faith and loyalty on a wager with Satan...a bloody wager.

If this story is true, then God is a f###-up sociopath tyrant: petty, cruel and arrogant. And when God bother to show up to reply to Job, he reveal more of his arrogant personality. There is nothing positive about God in this story; God is more of the villain than Satan.

Again, for me, God is not the sort of god that would consider to be worthy of respect and worship.

Do you want another example?

How about when Samuel, the spoken-person for God, told King Saul to attack the Amalekites and kill every man, woman and child (as well as any animal these people kept)?

Do you remember in Exodus 20, one of the commandments, was not to worship other gods or idols?

In it, it state that the children cannot inherit the sin of the father. But in the story with Saul and the Amalekites, the attack upon is for what the Amalekites did to Moses and the Israelites.



Here, it revealed that God holding grudges for what happened centuries ago, not by Saul's contemporaries. Why would God have people killed that happened centuries ago?

You are preaching to the choir. You are projecting on me what most other people of faith have told you. Did I not say my God created both good and evil? Go tell all those ignorant xtians who say God is pure goodness. Plus you are basing your view of God on nothing except an ancient book. You need not look further than WWII. 6 million Jews, 4 million Gentiles, 2 million frankensteins, sex slaves and lamp shades murdered.

And over 70 million veterans died trying to stop the insanity.

It is in the Bible "I will offer Israel as a burnt offering for the pleasing aroma, says the Lord."

You are assuming I believe like all the other men of faith you have met. Did I not say God is a God of good and evil?

 

[Brian Schuh]

Actually you are simply projecting your belief when you look at the world. And it is a biased view, hardly objective, and certainly not realistic.

If God does exist..and I am stressing on the "does"...he is not worthy at all.

To give you an example:

A God who tell Abraham to go and sacrifice his son, just to test Abraham's faith and to see if the father will kill his son because he ordered it, is not what I called a "good" god, even though God did stop the sacrifice at the last moment.

That God stop the sacrifice is not the point. The point is that he gave the order in the first place, showed that God is more like the trickster.

The funny thing is that Christians today blame Satan being evil personification - the Devil, father of lies, the trickster.

But who is the trickster in the Abraham-Isaac story?

God is the trickster.

And what about what happened in JOB. Christians blamed Satan, but on whose order did Satan followed? God.

God is much as responsible for Job's suffering and death of Job's first group of children.

And why did God allow this happened? To test Job's faith and loyalty on a wager with Satan...a bloody wager.

If this story is true, then God is a f###-up sociopath tyrant: petty, cruel and arrogant. And when God bother to show up to reply to Job, he reveal more of his arrogant personality. There is nothing positive about God in this story; God is more of the villain than Satan.

Again, for me, God is not the sort of god that would consider to be worthy of respect and worship.

Do you want another example?

How about when Samuel, the spoken-person for God, told King Saul to attack the Amalekites and kill every man, woman and child (as well as any animal these people kept)?

Do you remember in Exodus 20, one of the commandments, was not to worship other gods or idols?

In it, it state that the children cannot inherit the sin of the father. But in the story with Saul and the Amalekites, the attack upon is for what the Amalekites did to Moses and the Israelites.



Here, it revealed that God holding grudges for what happened centuries ago, not by Saul's contemporaries. Why would God have people killed that happened centuries ago?

Two corrections. God according to one midrash waited till Abraham actually wounded Isaac and Isaac was bleeding before God stopped him. According to a different midrash God actually allowed Isaac to be murdered.

King Saul murdered those Amaleks (that's what I call them) based on a corrupted Torah that had one word wrong. After the fact, the prophet presented a true Torah to King Saul with the correct text. Oh well Saul, it's not your fault. Too bad all those people are dead.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Actually you are simply projecting your belief when you look at the world. And it is a biased view, hardly objective, and certainly not realistic.

If God does exist..and I am stressing on the "does"...he is not worthy at all.

To give you an example:

A God who tell Abraham to go and sacrifice his son, just to test Abraham's faith and to see if the father will kill his son because he ordered it, is not what I called a "good" god, even though God did stop the sacrifice at the last moment.

That God stop the sacrifice is not the point. The point is that he gave the order in the first place, showed that God is more like the trickster.

The funny thing is that Christians today blame Satan being evil personification - the Devil, father of lies, the trickster.

But who is the trickster in the Abraham-Isaac story?

God is the trickster.

And what about what happened in JOB. Christians blamed Satan, but on whose order did Satan followed? God.

God is much as responsible for Job's suffering and death of Job's first group of children.

And why did God allow this happened? To test Job's faith and loyalty on a wager with Satan...a bloody wager.

If this story is true, then God is a f###-up sociopath tyrant: petty, cruel and arrogant. And when God bother to show up to reply to Job, he reveal more of his arrogant personality. There is nothing positive about God in this story; God is more of the villain than Satan.

Again, for me, God is not the sort of god that would consider to be worthy of respect and worship.

Do you want another example?

How about when Samuel, the spoken-person for God, told King Saul to attack the Amalekites and kill every man, woman and child (as well as any animal these people kept)?

Do you remember in Exodus 20, one of the commandments, was not to worship other gods or idols?

In it, it state that the children cannot inherit the sin of the father. But in the story with Saul and the Amalekites, the attack upon is for what the Amalekites did to Moses and the Israelites.



Here, it revealed that God holding grudges for what happened centuries ago, not by Saul's contemporaries. Why would God have people killed that happened centuries ago?

Look at the book of Esther, Hamon had 10 sons and a daughter, all Amaleks. When their planned genocide against the Jews failed, the tens sons were executed hung on the gallows and the daughter committed suicide by hanging herself.

WWII the 11 people responsible for the "final solution" 10 were executed by hanging, the 11th committed suicide. The 11 plus Hitler were positively identified as Amaleks.

Only difference- God saved the chosen people the first time but didn't the second.

If the book of Esther was written as an allegory trying to predict the future, it was a miserable failure.

 

[Shad]

How is that nonsensical? If God is the ultimate Law Giver, then how is it difficult to believe that He can change His own laws? Once you accept the fact that there is only one God. . . all truth follows from that.

It is arbitrary as you create a model that ends right at the point of belief you happen follow. Not a belief in God but a belief in the Noah story. You have no standard nor method to figure out if there was a change besides a story in a text from centuries ago, confirm there was a change, figure out what actually changed. Again all you have done is making something up to align with what you already believed in based on nothing but your religious view point.

You reply is pure sophistry as none it supports that there was a change nor that the story was true. You have jumped from God to your specific god, nothing more

 

[Brian Schuh]

It is arbitrary as you create a model that ends right at the point of belief you happen follow. Not a belief in God but a belief in the Noah story. You have no standard nor method to figure out if there was a change besides a story in a text from centuries ago, confirm there was a change, figure out what actually changed. Again all you have done is making something up to align with what you already believed in based on nothing but your religious view point.

You reply is pure sophistry as none it supports that there was a change nor that the story was true. You have jumped from God to your specific god, nothing more

Actually, I have a critical edition of the Hebrew bible and am going to take a year of college level Hebrew to learn to read it with a hassidic rabbi as a tutor since it is such recent scholarship no English is available, if one word is wrong, a bunch of Nazis and white supremacists could be murdered. And I would be as guilty as King Saul when he killed the Amaleks. So don't judge me.

 

[Shad]

Actually, I have a critical edition of the Hebrew bible and am going to take a year of college level Hebrew to learn to read it with a hassidic rabbi as a tutor since it is such recent scholarship no English is available, if one word is wrong, a bunch of Nazis and white supremacists could be murdered. And I would be as guilty as King Saul when he killed the Amaleks. So don't judge me.

Irrelevant. This education does not provide anything related to physics, which is what your model is actually addressing. Your response is nonsense and shows that you still have no idea of what you are talking about. You hold to a number of presupposition. First is the Bible is right and inerrant, a doctrine of religion nothing more. Second is that you can not be wrong. Three, that the former mean I can not judge you. All you have done is make grand claims then demand not to be criticized for your nonsensical argument. Too bad son. Anyone can judge you, welcome to reality.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Irrelevant. This education does not provide anything related to physics, which is what your model is actually addressing. Your response is nonsense and shows that you still have no idea of what you are talking about. You hold to a number of presupposition. First is the Bible is right and inerrant, a doctrine of religion nothing more. Second is that you can not be wrong. Three, that the former mean I can not judge you. All you have done is make grand claims then demand not to be criticized for your nonsensical argument. Too bad son. Anyone can judge you, welcome to reality.

A defer to Dr. Michael Schulman who has a 4 year degree in physics and a PhD in Torah. You can contact him through www.asknoah.org. I hope there are more mistakes in the so called "inerrant" than one so all the Amaleks are murdered (Amaleks=Nazis and white supremacists.) just like King Saul.

 

[Shad]

A defer to Dr. Michael Schulman who has a 4 year degree in physics and a PhD in Torah.

Irrelevent as none of these are degrees in physics

You can contact him through www.asknoah.org. I hope there are more mistakes in the so called "inerrant" than one so all the Amaleks are murdered (Amaleks=Nazis and white supremacists.) just like King Saul.

I am not going to a Rabbi for lessons in physics....

How can Amaleks be white supremacist when the very idea is based on scientific racism along with previous inferiority and superiority dynamics from Europe. Another nonsensical post from you that amounts to open babbling.

 

[Brian Schuh]

A defer to Dr. Michael Schulman who has a 4 year degree in physics and a PhD in Torah. You can contact him through www.asknoah.org. I hope there are more mistakes in the so called "inerrant" than one so all the Amaleks are murdered (Amaleks=Nazis and white supremacists.) just like King Saul.

I mean, if King Saul murdered a tribe of anti-smites based on one word mistake in the Torah, maybe 2 or 3 mistakes, we could wipe them all out.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Irrelevent as none of these are degrees in physics



I am not going to a Rabbi for lessons in physics....

Dr. Schulman is not a rabbi, and he was a physicist before he was a Torah scholar. If you are that educated, congrats. If not, whether you judge me or not, your judgment is swing's fecal matter.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Dr. Schulman is not a rabbi, and he was a physicist before he was a Torah scholar. If you are that educated, congrats. If not, whether you judge me or not, your judgment is swing's fecal matter.

I meant "a swine's fecal matter."

 

[Shad]

I meant "a swine's fecal matter."

Still not going to a wannabe Rabbi with a failure of a career in physics. Keep posting your argument from authority all you want. All you are doing is using a fallacy over and over but still haven't figured this out. Lets see your model reviewed by an actual peer-reviewed journal. Does this person even support your model? Or are you just grasping for authority to back your model in vain attempt at credibility you never had....

Another vain attempt to dismiss my opinion based on an arbitrary standard which is merely if I agree or disagree with your grand claims. Try again son.

 

[Brian Schuh]

Still not going to a wannabe Rabbi with a failure of a career in physics. Keep posting your argument from authority all you want. All you are doing is using a fallacy over and over but still haven't figured this out. Lets see your model reviewed by an actual peer-reviewed journal. Does this person even support your model? Or are you just grasping for authority to back your model in vain attempt at credibility you never had....

Another vain attempt to dismiss my opinion based on an arbitrary standard which is merely if I agree or disagree with your grand claims. Try again son.

"Nothing can keep a man in perpetual ignorance like contempt prior to investigation." After you talk to Dr. Schulman, I will take you off ignore.

 

[gnostic]

You are preaching to the choir. You are projecting on me what most other people of faith have told you. Did I not say my God created both good and evil? Go tell all those ignorant xtians who say God is pure goodness. Plus you are basing your view of God on nothing except an ancient book. You need not look further than WWII. 6 million Jews, 4 million Gentiles, 2 million frankensteins, sex slaves and lamp shades murdered.

And over 70 million veterans died trying to stop the insanity.

It is in the Bible "I will offer Israel as a burnt offering for the pleasing aroma, says the Lord."

You are assuming I believe like all the other men of faith you have met. Did I not say God is a God of good and evil?

Actually, I have a critical edition of the Hebrew bible and am going to take a year of college level Hebrew to learn to read it with a hassidic rabbi as a tutor since it is such recent scholarship no English is available, if one word is wrong, a bunch of Nazis and white supremacists could be murdered. And I would be as guilty as King Saul when he killed the Amaleks. So don't judge me.

I am not saying that these stories are true or that God is even real.

Those examples from Genesis (about Abraham), Job and 1 Samuel that I cited from, and about what I think of God's personality, they are only hypothetical and based on the bible' narratives.

It is all literary-based, so whether it is true or not, are only conjectures on how I view those passages regarding to god's action or commands.

I do recall, but I don't remember the exact verse, but in Isaiah somewhere, it does say something like god created both good and evil, both light and darkness.

But regardless of whether it is true or not, I would not follow or worship a god that are anything like those examples I had shown.

 

[Brian Schuh]

I am not saying that these stories are true or that God is even real.

Those examples from Genesis (about Abraham), Job and 1 Samuel that I cited from, and about what I think of God's personality, they are only hypothetical and based on the bible' narratives.

It is all literary-based, so whether it is true or not, are only conjectures on how I view those passages regarding to god's action or commands.

I do recall, but I don't remember the exact verse, but in Isaiah somewhere, it does say something like god created both good and evil, both light and darkness.

But regardless of whether it is true or not, I would not follow or worship a god that are anything like those examples I had shown.

First, whether or not you worship God, He commands that you fear him. After knowing the facts of the holocaust, you'd be a fool not to fear him. Then he commands that you love him. Elie Wiesel said, you can be angry with God and you can even hate God, but you cannot BE a Jew, without God. And he survived Aushwitch. Next, God commands that you serve Him, through Torah study and prayer. That is all God requires. But the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom-king Solomon.

 

[Brian Schuh]

First, whether or not you worship God, He commands that you fear him. After knowing the facts of the holocaust, you'd be a fool not to fear him. Then he commands that you love him. Elie Wiesel said, you can be angry with God and you can even hate God, but you cannot BE a Jew, without God. And he survived Aushwitch. Next, God commands that you serve Him, through Torah study and prayer. That is all God requires. But the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom-king Solomon.

The exact quote is, "A Jew can be angry with God, a Jew can even hate God, but a Jew cannot BE a Jew without God."

 

[Shad]

"Nothing can keep a man in perpetual ignorance like contempt prior to investigation." After you talk to Dr. Schulman, I will take you off ignore.

Why should I care what someone claims that does not have the integrity to submit his views for the review of his peers, physicists? Your argument can be used by any crackpot theorists, which your doctor is, as a defense. So rather than challenge me challenge your "authority" to have some intellectual integrity to have his view challenged by his fellow experts. Until his happens your authority is just another fringe crackpot outside of academia and hiding within religious circles. A circle that is more than willing to accept his claims as its nothing but confirmation bias for their silly views.