Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [OriginsTalk] A thought question

Expand Messages
  • Laurie Appleton
    ... From: Todd S. Greene To: OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 6:19 PM Subject: [OriginsTalk] A thought question todd: IF the Bible
    Message 1 of 9 , Oct 29, 2007
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Todd S. Greene
      To: OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 6:19 PM
      Subject: [OriginsTalk] A thought question


      todd: IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
      reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far longer
      than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
      the case?

      A. The young earth creationist interpretation of the Bible (that the
      Bible teaches that the world did not exist more than 6,000 or 10,000
      years ago) is correct.

      B. The young earth creationist interpretation is wrong.

      - Todd Greene


      LA> Are there NO other options? Are you quite sure that your "IF's" are not the cause of the conflict? Thus the proposition can just as easily be put the other way. i.e.;

      LA> IF evolutionism is a fact (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
      reality), and IF the world really has been in existence for far less
      than billions and billions of years, then which of the following must be
      the case?

      A. The old earth evolutionary interpretation of reality (that the
      evolution teaches that the world HAS exist more than 6,000 or 10,000
      years ago) is wrong.

      B. The young earth creationist interpretation is right.

      LA> So how scientifically valid are evolutionary claims of billions and billions of years -- apart from that being an admission that evolution from molecules to man is so utterly improbable that they seem to HIDE and obscure this by postulating enormous and impossible numbers of years?

      LA> The following from evolutionists themselves gives some pointers;

      ----------------
      "In general, dates in the "correct ball park" are
      assumed to be correct and are published, but those in
      disagreement with other data are seldom published nor are
      discrepancies fully explained."

      (Richard L. Mauger, Ph.D.(geology) (Associate Professor of
      Geology, East Carolina University, USA), 'K-Ar ages of biotites
      from tuffs in Eocene rocks of the Green River, Washakie, and
      Uinta Basins, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado'. Contributions to
      Geology, University of Wyoming, vol. 15(1), 1977, p. 37)

      ========

      "Thus, if one believes that the derived ages in
      particular instances are in gross disagreement with
      established facts of field geology, he must conjure up
      geological processes that could cause anomalous or altered
      argon contents of the minerals."

      (Prof.J.F.Evernden (Department of Geology, University of
      California, Berkeley, USA) and Dr John R.Richards (Research
      School of Earth Sciences, Australian National University,
      Canberra), "Potassium-argon ages in eastern Australia".
      Journal of the Geological Society of Australia, vol.9(1),
      1962, p.3.)

      ===========



      Laurie.

      "From my earliest training as a scientist, I was strongly brainwashed
      to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate
      creation. That notion has had to be painfully shed."
      (Chandra Wickramasinghe, noted ex atheistic scientist, 1981)


      ..


      Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
      Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
      Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity
      a.. 1New Members
      Visit Your Group
      Yahoo! News
      Odd News

      You won't believe

      it, but it's true

      Need traffic?
      Drive customers

      With search ads

      on Yahoo!

      Shedding Pounds
      on Yahoo! Groups

      Read sucess stories

      & share your own.
      .


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Victor
      ... Todd, you are using philosophy to interpret the Bible again. Scientific interpretations are based on an elementary assumption invented by a pagan
      Message 2 of 9 , Oct 30, 2007
        --- In OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com, "Todd S. Greene" <greeneto@...> wrote:
        >
        > IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
        > reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far longer
        > than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
        > the case?
        >
        > A. The young earth creationist interpretation of the Bible (that the
        > Bible teaches that the world did not exist more than 6,000 or 10,000
        > years ago) is correct.
        >
        > B. The young earth creationist interpretation is wrong.
        >
        > - Todd Greene
        >
        Todd, you are using philosophy to interpret the Bible again.
        Scientific interpretations are based on an elementary assumption
        invented by a pagan philosopher. Why should the Bible fit the ideas
        of pagans? Why should the Bible be scientific? Not a single writer
        who penned the Bible could even think scientifically. Solomon even
        denies the possibility of a valid science. The God of the Bible
        clearly states that He intends to make foolish the wisdom of this age.

        The biblical age of the universe is not a difficult problem, once
        people stop trying to tailor the Bible to fit science.

        1. We can confirm biblical concepts of time with our eyes, that days
        and years get shorter as history advances. We can follow with
        eyesight how all galactic orbits move outward, accelerating
        continually. We can compare the past with the present - because we
        can see the past optically, in all directions and a vast number of eras.

        2. Scientific ideas about time are dependent on perpetual motion
        atoms, even though we can see that every atom changes as it ages -
        visually.

        3. Biblical statements about the long-time, the vast ages in few
        years are not unique. All ancient people remembered with longing the
        vast ages of the earliest patriarchs. The pagan poets waxed eloquent
        about the great-time. We even find the skulls of our ancestors with
        thick brows, just like Job mentions about changed faces as men lived
        for geological ages. He specifies what kind of geological ages. Job
        lived in the age of the dinosaurs. The children's skulls did not have
        the thick brows, so clearly brows are indications of vast ages.

        How simple is a biblical history. We can see it. We can see how the
        galaxies formed, just like the Bible repeatedly states. We can see
        that every atom changes as it ages. We can see the evidence that the
        world is very old, yet all orbits speed up continually - because we
        can see it.

        How overwhelming is the triumph of the Bible over the science, the
        system that was built on the assumption that matter does not
        change-itself. The Bible contradicts this - and we can see the
        evidence for a biblical version of physics because visibly every atom
        changes its structure as it ages.

        Scientists have a sacred creed which does not allow them to believe
        what anyone can see, that matter continually changes. They even use
        their system of measurement, which they invented with their creed, to
        circularly confirm that atoms are perpetual motion machine. To
        protect their creed, their universe is 99% invisible, full of magic.
        They actually believe that everything was created out of nothing when
        the vacuum burped. They actually believe that the vacuum move
        galaxies to close to the speed of light. They actually believe that
        matter can disappear into a black hole, another undetectable thing.
        The amount of magical black matter, according to scientific myths, is
        much greater than normal, visible matter. All of the magical things
        were invented to protect their creed that matter does not change-itself.
      • Alan-
        ... If Up is Down, and Left is Right, and Dark is Light, and if Pigs flew in through Outer Space, and if the Poles were at the Equator, and if mammals were the
        Message 3 of 9 , Oct 30, 2007
          > IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
          > reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far longer
          > than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
          > the case?

          If Up is Down, and Left is Right, and Dark is Light, and if Pigs flew in
          through Outer Space, and if the Poles were at the Equator, and if
          mammals were the same as bacteria, and if the You Didn't Exist, ....if
          the world is older than a few thousand years....

          ...Right....
        • Laurie Appleton
          ... From: Alan- To: OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 2:02 PM Subject: Re: [OriginsTalk] A thought question TG IF the Bible is
          Message 4 of 9 , Nov 3, 2007
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: Alan-
            To: OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 2:02 PM
            Subject: Re: [OriginsTalk] A thought question


            TG> IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
            > reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far longer
            > than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
            > the case?

            Alan: If Up is Down, and Left is Right, and Dark is Light, and if Pigs flew in
            through Outer Space, and if the Poles were at the Equator, and if
            mammals were the same as bacteria, and if the You Didn't Exist, ....if
            the world is older than a few thousand years....

            ...Right....


            LA>Right on the money Alan. I doubt very much whether Todd S. Greene has ever stopped to consider any possibility outside of his addiction to the "monkey origin" view with which he appears to be afficted!


            Laurie.

            "In a way some aspects of Darwinism and of neo-Darwinism seem to me
            to have held back the progress of science." (Dr. Colin Patterson, noted
            evolutionist on BBC radio, "The Listner, 106:390, 1981)

            ..



            Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
            Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
            Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity
            a.. 4New Members
            Visit Your Group
            Yahoo! News
            Get it all here

            Breaking news to

            entertainment news

            Need traffic?
            Drive customers

            With search ads

            on Yahoo!

            Yahoo! Groups
            Health & Fitness

            Find and share

            weight loss tips.
            .


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Cogan, Susan L.
            ... Interesting that not a single creationist bothered to answer the question. But we did see thee or four ways to dodge the question. (The above being an
            Message 5 of 9 , Nov 7, 2007
              On 10/30/07 10:02 PM, "Alan-" <steelville@...> wrote:

              >> IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
              >> reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far longer
              >> than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
              >> the case?
              >
              > If Up is Down, and Left is Right, and Dark is Light, and if Pigs flew in
              > through Outer Space, and if the Poles were at the Equator, and if
              > mammals were the same as bacteria, and if the You Didn't Exist, ....if
              > the world is older than a few thousand years....
              >
              > ...Right....


              Interesting that not a single creationist bothered to answer the question.
              But we did see thee or four ways to dodge the question. (The above being an
              example)


              Susan Brassfield Cogan
              University of Oklahoma
              Printing Services
              Graphic Designer, Typesetter
              Phone: 325-4176
              Direct Line: 325-4264
              Fax: 579-0310

              Please visit my Web site:
              http://www.coganbooks.net
            • Victor
              ... longer ... flew in ... question. ... being an ... Susan, I answered the question. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/15033 We can see with
              Message 6 of 9 , Nov 8, 2007
                --- In OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com, "Cogan, Susan L."
                <susan-brassfield@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > On 10/30/07 10:02 PM, "Alan-" <steelville@...> wrote:
                >
                > >> IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
                > >> reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far
                longer
                > >> than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
                > >> the case?
                > >
                > > If Up is Down, and Left is Right, and Dark is Light, and if Pigs
                flew in
                > > through Outer Space, and if the Poles were at the Equator, and if
                > > mammals were the same as bacteria, and if the You Didn't Exist, ....if
                > > the world is older than a few thousand years....
                > >
                > > ...Right....
                >
                >
                > Interesting that not a single creationist bothered to answer the
                question.
                > But we did see thee or four ways to dodge the question. (The above
                being an
                > example)
                >
                >
                > Susan Brassfield Cogan
                > University of Oklahoma
                > Printing Services
                > Graphic Designer, Typesetter
                > Phone: 325-4176
                > Direct Line: 325-4264
                > Fax: 579-0310
                >
                > Please visit my Web site:
                > http://www.coganbooks.net
                >
                Susan, I answered the question.

                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/15033

                We can see with our eyes that the scientific way of measuring time is
                false and the biblical proscribed way is valid. This is visible
                because we can see how the orbits always accelerate because we can
                compare how the galaxies formed. We actually see the past and
                directly compare it to the present.

                Is the earth old - like the Bible states - we can see that it is.
                All ancient people counted only a few generations - but they all
                believed that ancient days and years were long and later ones keep
                getting shorter. The Bible clearly states that this is the case. We
                can see the evidence with our eyes because we can see how all orbits
                and all atoms continually speed up.

                So why is it so hard for scientists to accept what is visible?
                Because the scientific system was constructed on an idea, invented by
                a pagan Greek, that matter does not change-itself. The Biblical
                version of physics is visibly confirmed because we can see that every
                atom changes as it ages. We can see that no orbit in the universe is
                clock-like. In fact, we can see the orbits and the atoms both are
                changing together.

                So a question about the 6,000 year age of the earth is a meaningless
                question. The problem is that you are trying to force the universe to
                fit your assumption about fixed matter and fixed time. Did ancient
                people live for vast ages? The ancients said they did. Hesiod said a
                child played at his mother's knee until he was 100 years old. We even
                find the huge thick brows on their skulls, a clear indication of old
                age, since the children did not have the same brows. But even primary
                teeth on children were worn down by vast age.

                Is the western system false? We can see that it is because we can see
                the past. No wonder God says He will make foolish the wisdom of this age.
              • Clare Wilson Parr
                ... Interesting that a single creationist would be expected to: Answer these questions . . . . - How could Mary give birth as a virgin ? Did Jesus return
                Message 7 of 9 , Nov 8, 2007
                  On 11/7/2007, Cogan, Susan L. wrote:

                  > >> IF the Bible is infallible (i.e., does not teach a false idea about
                  > >> reality), and IF the world really has been in existence far, far
                  > longer
                  > >> than just 6,000 or 10,000 years, then which of the following must be
                  > >> the case?
                  > >
                  > > If Up is Down, and Left is Right, and Dark is Light, and if Pigs
                  > flew in
                  > > through Outer Space, and if the Poles were at the Equator, and if
                  > > mammals were the same as bacteria, and if the You Didn't Exist, ....if
                  > > the world is older than a few thousand years....
                  > >
                  > > ...Right....
                  >
                  >Interesting that not a single creationist bothered to answer the question.
                  >But we did see thee or four ways to dodge the question. (The above
                  >being an
                  >example)

                  Interesting that "a single 'creationist'" would be expected
                  to:

                  Answer these questions . . . . -

                  How could Mary give birth as a virgin ?
                  Did Jesus return from the dead ?
                  Where do you go after death
                  How much time required to create Earth ?

                  Now, how long did it take for you to answer all questions ?

                  Now . . ask me where I am going after I die. (I predict that you
                  have already answered the question I asked you to ask of me with
                  only one word ! )

                  The King James Bible starts with: "In the begining the word was
                  god (I'm not verbatum). In the original Greek or Armenian text: In
                  the begining there was "logos" and logos was god! Translation: in
                  ancient Greek logos was the word for: wisdom.
                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                  in view of the fact that the person who'd posted the questions
                  had previously opined that:

                  Religious people need not weigh the facts or seek evidence, thier
                  minds go directly to the instant habitual response, that which
                  has been memorized. When we converse with religious persons, we
                  are confronting a mind commited to a doctrine that because it is
                  a religious doctrine, it cannot be changed or subject to
                  interpretation.

                  Creationist, I think are not threatened by science, but by a
                  threat to the minds genetic tendency to hold on to habitual
                  behavior.
                  - - - - -

                  And then, isn't there "no way possible ... to communicate with
                  someone after he asserts that he believes:

                  "The King James Bible starts with: "In the begining the word was
                  god (I'm not verbatum)."

                  and

                  "[I]n ancient Greek logos was the word for: wisdom."

                  The KJV Bible's very first sentence is "In the beginning God
                  created the heavens and the earth."

                  The ancient Greek meaning of the word 'logos" is word or
                  reason. The ancient Greek word that means 'wisdom' is
                  sophia.

                  Lastly, Alan's response to the "question" isn't evasive,
                  it's a parody....
                • Alan-
                  ... **...A parody to illustrate that the answer to two false premises is an oxymoron. If anti-creationist cosmology and darwinian evolution were true, and the
                  Message 8 of 9 , Nov 8, 2007
                    >>.Lastly, Alan's response to the "question" isn't evasive, it's a parody....

                    **...A parody to illustrate that the answer to two false premises is an oxymoron.

                    If anti-creationist cosmology and darwinian evolution were true, and the evidence supported it, I would still be the materialist and darwinist that I was. Even if it were worse for the world, I would have shrugged and said "Tough breaks!"

                    But of course I heard "open-minded" so much in reference to the subject, it finally dawned on this darwinism-addled brain that a truly open-minded mind is truly open to whatever form the actual truth is. And in the words of Andrew Flew, follow the evidence.

                    --Alan
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.