• 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!

"One Fact to Refute Creationism"

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Look who's exactly talking about Genesis,
Look evolutionist like creationists the first thing they run to, to either to prove their case, is to the book of Genesis.

But yet neither the evolutionist nor the creationist, has no knowledge or understanding at all, of the first earth age.

But yet to hear the evolutionist and the creationist, think they it all together.

But yet there is no where in the Bible that states that everything started at Genesis.

Therefore whether it be the evolutionist or the creationist, They both have no concept about the first earth age.

Unto which the bible is very plain about the first earth age. And what got us from there to here, in this second earth age.

When discussing Christian myths of course Genesis is the first place one would go.

And you really should try to learn why we know that your beliefs are wrong.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
He understands the history of the Earth quite well.

You should really try to learn why we know the stories of Genesis to be myth.

He understands nothing about the history of the earth. If he did, then why isn't he explaining about the first earth age.

That's because he has no concept or idea or knowledge of understanding about the first earth age.
Evolutionist just like the creationist, the only thing they run to is the book of Genesis, trying to explain it or disprove it.

But neither one of them has no concept about the first earth age.

If they did, then they would that everything did not start at the book of Genesis, but rather way before the book of Genesis was ever written.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
He understands nothing about the history of the earth. If he did, then why isn't he explaining about the first earth age.

That's because he has no concept or idea or knowledge of understanding about the first earth age.
Evolutionist just like the creationist, the only thing they run to is the book of Genesis, trying to explain it or disprove it.

But neither one of them has no concept about the first earth age.

If they did, then they would that everything did not start at the book of Genesis, but rather way before the book of Genesis was ever written.

Your beliefs are wrong. There is no need to explain that which does not exist.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
When discussing Christian myths of course Genesis is the first place one would go.

And you really should try to learn why we know that your beliefs are wrong.

First of all I am not one of those other Christians as you say or think I am.

The book of Genesis is not where everything started. What's so hard for you to understand. That I do not support the creationist as saying that everything started in the book of Genesis, That's all False.
You show yourself of having no concept when things started, and it sure wasn't in the book of Genesis.

Everything started way back in the first earth age. That's way before the book of Genesis was ever written.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
First of all I am not one of those other Christians as you say or think I am.

The book of Genesis is not where everything started. What's so hard for you to understand. That I do not support the creationist as saying that everything started in the book of Genesis, That's all False.
You show yourself of having no concept when things started, and it sure wasn't in the book of Genesis.

Everything started way back in the first earth age. That's way before the book of Genesis was ever written.
So what is the Book of Genesis describing?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
First of all I am not one of those other Christians as you say or think I am.

The book of Genesis is not where everything started. What's so hard for you to understand. That I do not support the creationist as saying that everything started in the book of Genesis, That's all False.
You show yourself of having no concept when things started, and it sure wasn't in the book of Genesis.

Everything started way back in the first earth age. That's way before the book of Genesis was ever written.

And you showed that you have no understanding of the history of the Earth. That is why I said you need to learn why we know that you are wrong.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Your beliefs are wrong. There is no need to explain that which does not exist.

You just explained it, that you have no concept about the first earth age.

Until you can explain about the first earth age, you have nothing to go on.

Leave the book of Genesis out of it.

I am not talking about the book of Genesis.

I am talking about way before the book of Genesis was ever written.

What's so hard for you, to leave the book of Genesis out of it.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You just explained it, that you have no concept about the first earth age.

Until you can explain about the first earth age, you have nothing to go on.

Leave the book of Genesis out of it.

I am not talking about the book of Genesis.

I am talking about way before the book of Genesis was ever written.

What's so hard for you, to leave the book of Genesis out of it.

Wrong again, your "first age" is non-existent. When you tried to defend it in another thread you only demonstrated that you are the one that has no knowledge.

Once again you should really try to learn why we know that you are wrong.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
So what is the Book of Genesis describing?

To answer your question, the book of Genesis is describing how we came to be in this second earth age, from the first earth age.
Therefore everything DID NOT start with the book of Genesis.

But started back in the first earth age.

Look, why are you going to the book of Genesis.
When I said nothing about the book of Genesis.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Wrong again, your "first age" is non-existent. When you tried to defend it in another thread you only demonstrated that you are the one that has no knowledge.

Once again you should really try to learn why we know that you are wrong.

So you say, doesn't prove a thing, All your showing is your lack of knowledge of even knowing about the first earth age of the dinosaurs.
Had you any knowledge about the first earth age, you could explain it.

I may have over step myself back, but that does not take away the fact of the first earth age.
I went on what I knew and saw back years ago, which since then, things have changed bringing new things about.

But the human footprints and the dinosaurs footprints are still in question, from what I have gathered.

But I leave that, until either side has prove them to be false or true.

Whether they are false or true, does not take away the fact of the first earth age.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
And you showed that you have no understanding of the history of the Earth. That is why I said you need to learn why we know that you are wrong.


Maybe then, you can explain about the Earth's history about the first earth age.

Since you come across like you know so much about the Earth's history.

You have no concept about what I'm saying about the first earth age. If you did, then you would explain it.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Wrong again, your "first age" is non-existent. When you tried to defend it in another thread you only demonstrated that you are the one that has no knowledge.

Once again you should really try to learn why we know that you are wrong.

Look it still doesn't take away from the fact about the first earth age.
If the first earth age, as you say, is non-existent existence, than explain, just how is the earth here. You have a start of something to get to the second part.. without it then there's nothing.

The start of the earth is the first earth age, then the second earth age, is to where we are now.
Take away the first, there is no place for the second, that's all common sense.

But the second is here, that means the first had to be there, for the second to exist.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
(it's only 2:30 long)​
I'm not so interested in Dawkins reply to the request to come up with one sentence to convince the creationist to doubt their theory, but rather his observation of the intractable stance creationists take against the evidence supporting evolution. Dawkins says creationists "simply don't listen They simply stick their fingers in their ears and say 'la la la' " Dawkins calls this a disgrace to the human species.

So my question to the RF creationists here is, is this your stance as well? There is absolutely no fact, or set of facts, or bushels of facts that will ever convince you to doubt creationism. Personally, I believe it is. To admit the possibility that creationism might be wrong is to open a chink in the armor of one's faith. And fearing such a possibility the creationist's best defense is to stick ones fingers in one's ears.

So, am I right or am I right?

.









It helps me sort my own stubborn beliefs that you quoted Dawkins, one of the kindest, most open-minded, sensitive, thoughtful men in the human race. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Wrong again, your "first age" is non-existent. When you tried to defend it in another thread you only demonstrated that you are the one that has no knowledge.

Once again you should really try to learn why we know that you are wrong.

Look when I stated as to how the dinosaurs footprints and human footprints as being found together, that now the creationist and scientist are in a dispute over whether or not they are false or true.

I would say that the Creationists are wrong, because the Creationists are taught by their Pastors, Preachers that everything started at Adam and Eve, which is not true.

I have found, that those dinosaur footprints and human footprints have not been proven whether they are false or true.
Until then, we can't say one way or another.

But that does not take away from the fact that the dinosaurs did exist.and that is factual.
Therefore the first earth age of the dinosaurs is factual also.

Just because you have no concept about the first earth age, doesn't mean it didn't exist. The dinosaurs bones stands there in evidence that the first earth age did exist.
 

ImmortalFlame

Woke gremlin
To answer your question, the book of Genesis is describing how we came to be in this second earth age, from the first earth age.
Therefore everything DID NOT start with the book of Genesis.

But started back in the first earth age.

Look, why are you going to the book of Genesis.
When I said nothing about the book of Genesis.
Thanks for your answer - I was just curious.
 

Faithofchristian

Well-Known Member
Thanks for your answer - I was just curious.

Thank you for being patience.

If I may explain, The Creationists are taught by their Pastors, Preachers that everything started with Adam and Eve, unto which that is not true.

When in fact we have the dinosaurs bones proving otherwise.

The Creationists are taught to believe that the dinosaurs were created there with Adam and Eve.But there is no where in the book of Genesis to support their claim.

Unless you want to delete and add to the creation week of Genesis.which the creationist do both deleting and adding to the book of Genesis,

The reason behind the Creationists goes on the attack about the dinosaur bones, is because the dinosaur bones destroys their whole concept of everything as starting with Adam and Eve.

The dinosaurs are that first earth age.and the second earth age, is what we are living in now.
Thank you for time.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
The question is, why do we all experience the same illusion?
Why does a chair look and feel the same to everybody?
How about just keep it simple - the answer I would go with being:

"Because we all have a set of sensory-reception equipment that is built to a (more or less) common specification, and the energy/material of the universe in any given moment of time is a constant, regardless who among us is receiving said sensory input."

...and nor do you
The answer above seems to cover the bases pretty well, I feel.

Religionists say that we all see the same illusion and it seems solid because God created this video game of life and put us in it
”Non-Creationists” say that we all see the same illusion and it seems solid because it’s all magic
They say ‘that’s how it is.’ It just appeared like that out of nowhere. Magic
Why do so many seem to feel entitled to "answers?" While it may make sense, or be an interesting scientific or intellectual exercise to question why the universe exists as it does, where all this stuff came from, or why our senses interpret things in the way that they do, in the end, if we don't end up learning the "why" of existence, it could simply be because there is no such answer. In any given system, there is a base level of functionality that simply has to exist and for which no further explanation is necessary.

For example, take the system of counting - just talking numbers, no tricks. Within this system we have the abstract idea of "1" - a singular unit or object. Do we need to question "WHY 1?" Does that get us anywhere? It is simply a fundamental subject of the system it resides within, and without it, the system doesn't exist. Should we demand more out of the unit "1?"

"Where did 1 come from?"
"Who created 1?"
"If there weren't 1, what would there be?"

In the same sort of way, there may be no answer forthcoming as to why mass attracts mass, why atoms are capable of reacting to one another as solid when they are composed entirely of tight-knit energies, why the matter of the universe is here. What we have proof of is that it IS here, it DOES react with itself, we ARE a part of it. I'm not advocating that we stop questioning, poking and prodding... only that we stop expecting that the answers will lead us to some kind of end or ultimate answer. There will only ever be more questions and the universe simply doesn't care about that. "Magic" just doesn't seem the right term for things like this - because it tends to imply supernatural origin. These are simply base-level processes of the system of reality.
 

Prestor John

Well-Known Member
Granted, I am most likely unaware of every single bit of evidence used to support the theories of Evolution, but nothing I have seen has refuted my beliefs concerning a Creation event thus far.

I just don't see any conflict.
 
Last edited:

Prestor John

Well-Known Member
Thank you for being patience.

If I may explain, The Creationists are taught by their Pastors, Preachers that everything started with Adam and Eve, unto which that is not true.

When in fact we have the dinosaurs bones proving otherwise.

The Creationists are taught to believe that the dinosaurs were created there with Adam and Eve.But there is no where in the book of Genesis to support their claim.

Unless you want to delete and add to the creation week of Genesis.which the creationist do both deleting and adding to the book of Genesis,

The reason behind the Creationists goes on the attack about the dinosaur bones, is because the dinosaur bones destroys their whole concept of everything as starting with Adam and Eve.

The dinosaurs are that first earth age.and the second earth age, is what we are living in now.
Thank you for time.
I am a "Creationist" and I have never been taught, nor do I believe that everything started with Adam and Eve.

I would argue that the Genesis account clearly teaches that Adam and Eve were not present at the beginning of this world.

The idea that the Creation took a week comprised of seven 24-hour periods is not supported by the original Hebrew, which describe the "days" mentioned in the English translations of the Genesis account as indeterminate "periods of time."

Not all "Creationists" take issue with the existence of dinosaurs.

You seem to be painting with a very large brush.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
So my question to the RF creationists here is, is this your stance as well?

I can't take the question seriously because it rests upon a false dichotomy: that biological evolution and mythic tales of the workings of the world are necessarily in conflict with or opposed to one another.

What facts, if presented, would convince you to burn all of your movie collection and never watch movies ever again?

That's kind of how this question reads to me.
 
Top