Little Dragon
Well-Known Member
Gibberish.
-
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!
Questions that evolutionists and billions of years proponents cannot answer but disprove their theories.
- Thread starter SavedByTheLord
- Start date
McBell
Admiral Obvious
How about you start with the ones you have been flat out asked to provide?
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Since when you do you want to stay on subject?
you hop all the over place, sometimes multiple times in a single post...
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
I have lots to discuss.
What was the first living creature’s first offspring and exactly how did that happen?
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Stanley Jr.
Well, its mommy and daddy started kissing, that turned into wrestling...
Wait...
Are you old enough to be hearing about the birds and bees?
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
And Stanley Jr's offspring?
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Stanley Jr Jr
And then George
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Or Stanley III
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Nope.
George.
And somewhere in the first ten generations there is a Fred and a Max, but I do not remember off the top my head where in the top ten they fall.
@Little Dragon , did you read the source you posted?
From your own source:
“Bible scholar Dr Lydia McGrew studies and writes about the Gospels…..
McGrew suggests that when sources are generally shown to be reliable, one allows them the benefit of the doubt when apparent contradictions arise, and assumes that the error is probably on one’s understanding of the passage rather than the passage itself.”
Have you ‘studied’ the Bible?
If not, how would you know if she is right or wrong?
Also from your source:
Dr. Lydia McGrew (above) and “Dr. Michael Licona,…a reputable New Testament scholar,…agree that the New Testament is generally historically reliable….”
This statement by itself seems to nullify any further claims that there are substantial errors in the Greek Scriptures.
From your own source:
“Bible scholar Dr Lydia McGrew studies and writes about the Gospels…..
McGrew suggests that when sources are generally shown to be reliable, one allows them the benefit of the doubt when apparent contradictions arise, and assumes that the error is probably on one’s understanding of the passage rather than the passage itself.”
Have you ‘studied’ the Bible?
If not, how would you know if she is right or wrong?
Also from your source:
Dr. Lydia McGrew (above) and “Dr. Michael Licona,…a reputable New Testament scholar,…agree that the New Testament is generally historically reliable….”
This statement by itself seems to nullify any further claims that there are substantial errors in the Greek Scriptures.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
What caused the Big Bang and where did all the fine tuned orderly laws come from?
It is delusion to be believe it just popped into existence or has always existed?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Generally does not mean error free. I do not understand why so many believers insist upon black and white fallacies. For example those scholars would probably both agree that that there is a ten year difference in the dates of Jesus's birth between the nativity tale told in Matthew and the one told in Luke. And if pressed they would probably say that both are false.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
For you to be uneducated in any of the sciences you are trying to argue against, I calculate the odds as about 1 in 1
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
I guess it's a good thing then that evolution doesn't work like that
But how would you know that, off course, with your allergy to learning
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Here is something to make your brain go POP
Always = a period of a time. All of time, to be exact.
Time = finite into the past.
The beginning of the universe = T=0; the beginning of time.
Go back and point to any point in time. The universe existed then.
Conclusion:
At any time in the past, the universe existed.
Hence, the universe existed for all of time.
And as we have seen above: all of time = always.
So from this follows:
The universe has always existed.
I will wait while you scrap your brain from that wall it was splattered against.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
And what caused that finely tuned and orderly universe to be at that finite time in the past?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
This is a poorly asked question. You need to prove that the universe is "finely tuned and orderly". That is pretty much a worthless claim if you cannot support it.
Run away!!
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
What caused the universe to come into being and what caused the laws of nature to come into being? Is that better?
BTW they are fine tuned and orderly.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
It seems you haven't scrapped your entire brain from the wall yet.
Causality is a temporal phenomenon.
So you are basically trying to invoke a temporal phenomenon in atemporal context.
It makes no sense.