God Recreated the Earth 6,000 Years Ago!

[Thief]

A simple yes or no would have sufficed and actually been a much better answer...but alas...I have no doubt that even if I could somehow remove the "labels" ,although I do not see how as we are talking history and those labels are necessary for understanding the question, that I would get the same exact uninformative response....making this a circular discussion ....and I have to tell you the repeated non-answer is getting tiresome, which was likely what you were hoping for to begin with...... so without further adieu... your repeated non-answer has won the day.....and this topic is not all that important to me to make me wish to continue the debate...but I promise no such withdrawal in a discussion I find important, should one arise.....have a nice day

We are not talking history.

There was no one there but God......no one to write it down.

Is there a history text with God's signature on it?
Some people claim it's in the dna.

Too bad God didn't leave a stick'em somewhere.

 

[Thief]

Proselytizing rhetoric

Not one bit has anything to with a young earth.

and this is a religious forum under the topic......did GOD recreate the earth 6,000yrs ago.....

Not sure about the numbers....
not sure about the names.....

but we did diverge from the rest of the animal kingdom ....rather suddenly....

See Chapter Two.....Genesis.

 

[outhouse]

but we did diverge from the rest of the animal kingdom ....rather suddenly....

Factually false, we did not. You cannot post garbage on here without a credible source you are proselytizing faith. Faith is not a debate tool.

IT IS Unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Provide credible sources.

See Chapter Two.....Genesis.

factually not a credible source

 

[outhouse]

did GOD recreate the earth 6,000yrs ago.....

Factually no.

 

[Thief]

Factually false, we did not. You cannot post garbage on here without a credible source you are proselytizing faith. Faith is not a debate tool.

IT IS Unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Provide credible sources.



factually not a credible source

faith might be a tool....but it is the pivot of a religious forum.
you ain't got a religious forum without it.

 

[David M]

but we did diverge from the rest of the animal kingdom ....rather suddenly....

Circa 6 million years is "suddenly"? Stone tool use dating back 2 million years and use of fire dating back a million years is "Suddenly"? Even art dates back 100,000 years or more.

 

[BilliardsBall]

This is the same as saying you were not there YOU DID NOT see jesus on the cross, so throw it all out as mythology.

Sorry not credible.



Sorry but your not really holding any credible argument here. You have no credible understanding of science, YOU dont get to cherry pick things in your favor, while throwing away facts you don't personally like.

I think you misunderstand the science of modern cosmology. The statement was rhetorical. Conservation of matter and energy could not logically exist if there was no matter or energy, and then there was a whole bunch of it.

I agree that we should not cherry pick scientific fact. Fortunately, there are thousands of pages of scientific literature debunking the thornier problems and issues of modern science.

 

[BilliardsBall]

What evidence can there possibly be for things that do not exist?

Think about that for a minute...

How would you propose someone conduct an experiment to disprove a thing that has never been quantified or validated?
All we can do is take the claims of something metaphysical and test them against some variables to see if they hold up. Likewise, in order to verify the metaphysical, all you have to do is test a few claims against some constants and variables and see if they hold up. The fact that there is not a single metaphysical claim that has ever been proven to be worth it's weight in toilet paper says everything you should need to know about metaphysical claims.

Pick one - Anything metaphysical that you want, we'll break it down to see if it's worth a damn.

You and I cannot prove that there is not an invisible space wizard living in our backyards right now. There's no evidence for it, admittedly. But we still can't DISprove it, right?
Does that mean that faith, or belief, or even going so far as talking to the Invisible Space Wizard is something that you suggest we do? Is that a logical or sensical thing for us to do?

I hope you know I already have heard many atheistic arguments against the possibility of disproving or proving a given negative. Such arguments are semantic word play. We can visit your home right now and prove there is no lion inside. The very statement "a negative cannot be proven" is itself a negative statement. If it is a true statement, therefore, we have demonstrated that a negative can be proven.

But to verify the metaphysical, you yourself can perform simple verifiable, testifiable, falsifiable experiments. I did so, and received evidence I feel was conclusive enough to have made a decision for faith and Christ.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Take note of that list especially from people that died before the theory of evolution was developed. Being ignorant of evolution does not make their views from centuries ago true. Argument from ignorance.

It seems you are wholly unaware that millions of people of faith also believe in evolution, including countless scientists. Argument from ignorance.

 

[BilliardsBall]

AND YOU have no credible opinion here. PROVIDE CREDIBLE SOURCES or you will be reported for proselytizing

Eve is 100% mythological according to all credible sources.

Fortunately, then, you are not proselytizing atheism.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Oh, please.

This is why I hate people who would only use one philosophy, as if that one philosophy can also answer all questions.

You are forgetting that metaphysics also deal with reality, not just with being and existence. To put it simply, metaphysics try to answer the the question of "existence" or "being" in "reality".

A cow is a being and that being exist in reality. It is a creature that you can see.

Sure, there are something you don't see.

Electricity exist in reality, but often you can see electricity until you touch an object, like exposed live wire, and get shock or electrocuted.

A lot of spectrum in electromagnetism can not be seen, but we know that it exist in reality. Take for example, radio wave or radio frequency. Physicists understand that radio waves exist, and create devices, like radio, TV, wireless network devices, Bluetooth devices, etc.

As to a deity and spirit, we cannot know that these exist in reality, so metaphysically they (gods and spirits) don't exist beyond personal belief, imagination or delusion. A god don't exist beyond the ink and paper, beyond paint and canvas, and beyond marble and bronze (sculptures). We can represent them (gods) in some ways, through writings, drawings, paintings or sculptures, but all of these only come from man's imagination, and not in reality.

This is why gods and spirits fall under supernatural, not in reality, and certainly not metaphysically.

Please demonstrate how you know empiricism to be true. Bear in mind that you are about to make an argument(s) from empiricist data, and that you are presupposing that empirical objects "exist".

 

[BilliardsBall]

Factually false, we did not. You cannot post garbage on here without a credible source you are proselytizing faith. Faith is not a debate tool.

IT IS Unsubstantiated rhetoric.

Provide credible sources.



factually not a credible source

With humility, may I point out to you kindly that saying a source is not credible is actually slander until you provide evidence to the contrary. For example, there are three dozen Bible authors across 1,500 years, 9 for the NT alone. There are also 10 first century non-Bible historians who say things like "There are a bunch of Jews following Jesus, whom they say resurrected." Do you have contemporary documents proving the Bible authors were not credible or are you making an argument from silence?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Circa 6 million years is "suddenly"? Stone tool use dating back 2 million years and use of fire dating back a million years is "Suddenly"? Even art dates back 100,000 years or more.

Talk about cherry picking indeed. You noticed this but failed to notice someone opposed just said that the Chinese culture is the oldest that exists that is proved to go ALL the way back... way back... 6 million... no... 1 million... no, about 6,000 years... because we have limited tools and documents to really get those ages down... and because until very recent times it was said even by my Chinese friends to be 5,000 years, which is when the, uh, um, Flood occurred.

 

[David M]

Talk about cherry picking indeed. You noticed this but failed to notice someone opposed just said that the Chinese culture is the oldest that exists that is proved to go ALL the way back... way back... 6 million... no... 1 million... no, about 6,000 years... because we have limited tools and documents to really get those ages down... and because until very recent times it was said even by my Chinese friends to be 5,000 years, which is when the, uh, um, Flood occurred.

Talk about not understanding a post, I replied to a statement about the divergence of humans from other animals.

Thief's post did not refer to the age of human culture.

 

[David M]

With humility, may I point out to you kindly that saying a source is not credible is actually slander until you provide evidence to the contrary. For example, there are three dozen Bible authors across 1,500 years, 9 for the NT alone. There are also 10 first century non-Bible historians who say things like "There are a bunch of Jews following Jesus, whom they say resurrected." Do you have contemporary documents proving the Bible authors were not credible or are you making an argument from silence?

10 first century historians? Which would those be then?

 

[outhouse]

You might want to research REAL facts, not the mythology your peddling. Pseudoscience has no credibility.


We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has never contradicted these results:

1. In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
2. Since its formation, the Earth – its geology and its environments – has changed under the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
3. Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
4. Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin.

 

[outhouse]

There are also 10 first century non-Bible historians who say things like "There are a bunch of Jews following Jesus, whom they say resurrected

Please provide CREDIBLE sources to back this factually false claim up.

ONLY Josephus mentions Jesus long after the fact, and he barely mentions him, but he does mention Jesus teacher John quite well.

The resurrection was added later in mythology, the original Mark barely even mentioned this event. It was not central or even believed by people of that time period.

Only later unknown authors layered it into their theology using mythology in rhetorical prose.


ALL of the NT authors were far removed from any event and not one was an eyewitness to any followers or event in the Galileans life.

 

[Wu Wei]

We are not talking history.

There was no one there but God......no one to write it down.

Is there a history text with God's signature on it?
Some people claim it's in the dna.

Too bad God didn't leave a stick'em somewhere.

Nope..based on your post, you are talking god based on faith, I am talking history based on fact. And I am getting the feeling you are not interested in discussion as much as you are in preaching.

You talk like most very religious people...which translates to you are not interested in historic facts because they are...well...inconvenient and hard to get around.

Like I said...I'm done...you have a nice day

 

[outhouse]

Nope..based on your post, you are talking god based on faith, I am talking history based on fact. And I am getting the feeling you are not interested in discussion as much as you are in preaching.

You talk like most very religious people...which translates to you are not interested in historic facts because they are...well...inconvenient and hard to get around.

Like I said...I'm done...you have a nice day

He is known for his proselytizing and lack of debating.

 

[jonathan180iq]

I hope you know I already have heard many atheistic arguments against the possibility of disproving or proving a given negative. Such arguments are semantic word play. We can visit your home right now and prove there is no lion inside. The very statement "a negative cannot be proven" is itself a negative statement. If it is a true statement, therefore, we have demonstrated that a negative can be proven.

But to verify the metaphysical, you yourself can perform simple verifiable, testifiable, falsifiable experiments. I did so, and received evidence I feel was conclusive enough to have made a decision for faith and Christ.

I'm happy you've had many conversations before - but let's just focus on this one..

What evidence can there possibly be for something that does not exist?
What evidence could there possibly against it? If something is real, there is some sort of tangible, quantifiable, verifiable evidence, somewhere, right?
I something is not real, then what evidence could you ever provide for disproving it, other than the fact that there is an immense lack of positive evidence?

Do you see this works? It is not word play - It is incredibly simple logic.

If a Supernatural claim is to have any merit whatsoever in a rational discussion, then it has to be substantiated with something other than personal conviction. Surely you agree with that statement.
If I said there was a lion in my house, you could easily prove or disprove that claim. But if I told you the Lion was invisible and you simply had to have faith that there was a lion in my house... well that would change everything wouldn't it? You certainly wouldn't accept that there was lion sleeping on my sofa, just because I was very adamant about the invisible lion, would you? Wouldn't you naturally expect more proof of the invisible lion than just my boisterous claims, regardless of how sincere they were?

Of course you would!

So if you want to make a claim for the supernatural, or the metaphysical, or from a place of devout conviction - you're simply going to have to supply something more substantial than saying "This is my belief, and I REALLY REALLY believe it, so you have you accept it as being true!"

Please demonstrate how you know empiricism to be true. Bear in mind that you are about to make an argument(s) from empiricist data, and that you are presupposing that empirical objects "exist".

Empirical data is the supreme standard by which to measure reality - relying on anything else would allow for any and all suggestions to be considered equal.

Without empirical standards, the assertion that the Solar System is Geocentric and ruled over by a Master Race of Flying Squirrels is equal to the assertion that the Solar System is Helicentric and adheres to the Laws of Physics.