It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What predictions does Creationism make? (a fundamental requirement in science class)

page: 17
13
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147

There are several problems with the subject you have brought forth and the presumption that in some manner "creationists" views are in contrast to the to date findings of Science.

While in some confused understanding of what the Biblical Account outlines, there are some that presume some pretty curious ideas that approach lunacy, and make for lots of ridicule and in some cases, confrontations, that is not required between these apparently alternative arguements

Biblically speaking, there is ample offerings that express time before Adam and Eve.

Earth Ages, a Behemoth that discriptively sound much like a Brontesaurs, earth shaking events, a rebellious falling out between God and approximately a 1/3 of his Sons, along with other references point to something occurring long before the Events many Religious Sects discuss and outline in their sermons.

There is also a wee problem with the possibility that the Irish Translators applied some previous teachings and utilized corrupted sources to misrepresent the main verse of the Bible itself, being Genesis 1:1

A literal translation from the Chaldenan was added to with addition words that do not appear in the Ancient Writings to arrive to the commonly quoted, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, and it was void and without form....."

While this is the main manner in which the Bible opens, there is a possibly more accurate translation that doesn't require any additional words to bring the Chaldenan to English.

It could, (should) read "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, and it became a waste and a desolation......"

Now this may not mean much to some, but the importance is this planet was created and at sometime, became a waste and a desolation, which is significant in regard to one area, God.

No where, in the Bible, does it suggest that God created anything that wasn't good in the Eyes of God. You can see it in the balance of the Genesis 1 account. Why are we to assume the biggest thing he created was anything contrary to the same. God doesn't create voids and without form.

God created this earth, and something took place to cause the balance of the Genesis Account.

Science on the other hand has recorded time from between the in the beginning to the became a waste...

Science calls this evolution, where I deem it part of God's original Creation. The spark of life added to a single cell to spawn the Events evolutionist embrace.

No, this presumptive argument you present is not really that conflictive. It is based on one side not knowing they need to learn the Bible for themselves rather than being told something from a pulpit, and an other side studying the evidence they opt to concentrate on.

Kudos to Science for that. It's time Creationist should do the same. To me, God created Evolution, if a term needs to be applied

Thanks for allowing me to express my view on this. It may not be the way others view it, but that's fine

Ciao for now

Shane

edit on 21-11-2015 by Shane because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-11-2015 by Shane because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Ghost147

The question of whether there is a Creator, is more on the grounds of philosophy rather than Science. Why? Lets use a watch to answer that question. If we are using Science to describe a watch, then the results we should get should all be about how the watch works. It should describe the mechanisms available, there function, and maybe how long each mechanical process takes. That is all we should get from a Scientific point of view. Where is the creator of the watch? Science doesn't care. Science is a process used to describe the mechanistic processes behind the way something works. It does not care about anything on the level of an agent. It does not give you any information on the agent who created the watch. We would have to use logical reasoning rather than an evidential argument in order to determine the existence of an agent behind that watch. We need philosophy in order to talk about things on the level of an agent.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

That was well said, and quite scienctific. Kudos



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Shane

You had some good points yourself sir.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 11:04 AM
link   
The Christian view on creationism predicts that science would show a starting point of creation and that there will be an end of creation...a stopping point of some sort. Everything in between is detail. The starting point is pretty much excepted science ATM....and everything point at it all ending in a few billion years...so we're still on track.



posted on Dec, 14 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   
originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Ghost147

ServantOfTheLamb: The question of whether there is a Creator, is more on the grounds of philosophy rather than Science. Why? Lets use a watch to answer that question. If we are using Science to describe a watch, then the results we should get should all be about how the watch works. It should describe the mechanisms available, there function, and maybe how long each mechanical process takes. That is all we should get from a Scientific point of view. Where is the creator of the watch? Science doesn't care. Science is a process used to describe the mechanistic processes behind the way something works. It does not care about anything on the level of an agent. It does not give you any information on the agent who created the watch. We would have to use logical reasoning rather than an evidential argument in order to determine the existence of an agent behind that watch. We need philosophy in order to talk about things on the level of an agent.

The absolute or 1 is unchangeable , always has and will exist throughout what you conceptualize "eternity" untouchable as a concept as cannot be divided or multiplied altered. Zero is infinity or what is the catalyst/causal to change the affect of the (very small or very large) divide particularize, individuate in concert with 1 (its all in the decimal placing).
edit on 14-12-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Ghost147

The question of whether there is a Creator, is more on the grounds of philosophy rather than Science. Why? Lets use a watch to answer that question. If we are using Science to describe a watch, then the results we should get should all be about how the watch works. It should describe the mechanisms available, there function, and maybe how long each mechanical process takes. That is all we should get from a Scientific point of view. Where is the creator of the watch? Science doesn't care. Science is a process used to describe the mechanistic processes behind the way something works. It does not care about anything on the level of an agent. It does not give you any information on the agent who created the watch. We would have to use logical reasoning rather than an evidential argument in order to determine the existence of an agent behind that watch. We need philosophy in order to talk about things on the level of an agent.


Forensic scientists would have words with you....
edit on 15-12-2015 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 08:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Ghost147

The question of whether there is a Creator, is more on the grounds of philosophy rather than Science. Why? Lets use a watch to answer that question. If we are using Science to describe a watch, then the results we should get should all be about how the watch works. It should describe the mechanisms available, there function, and maybe how long each mechanical process takes. That is all we should get from a Scientific point of view. Where is the creator of the watch? Science doesn't care. Science is a process used to describe the mechanistic processes behind the way something works. It does not care about anything on the level of an agent. It does not give you any information on the agent who created the watch. We would have to use logical reasoning rather than an evidential argument in order to determine the existence of an agent behind that watch. We need philosophy in order to talk about things on the level of an agent.


Where is God's creator? Who made the watchmaker? This is where your cleverly fashioned rhetoric falls apart.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: DbDraad
The Christian view on creationism predicts that science would show a starting point of creation and that there will be an end of creation...a stopping point of some sort. Everything in between is detail. The starting point is pretty much excepted science ATM....and everything point at it all ending in a few billion years...so we're still on track.


That is an over simplified and incorrect way of describing scientific theory to make it seem like it aligns with Christian mysticism. By your same rationale, I could use ANY mythology to explain the universe. After all, most mythologies have a beginning of the universe story and many have an end of the universe story.



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DbDraad
The Christian view on creationism predicts that science would show a starting point of creation and that there will be an end of creation...a stopping point of some sort. Everything in between is detail. The starting point is pretty much excepted science ATM....and everything point at it all ending in a few billion years...so we're still on track.


That is an over simplified and incorrect way of describing scientific theory to make it seem like it aligns with Christian mysticism. By your same rationale, I could use ANY mythology to explain the universe. After all, most mythologies have a beginning of the universe story and many have an end of the universe story.

Christian and 'mysticism' do not work within the same sentence as mysticism is Eastern thought (eastern method ends when science begins); Christianity is Western. Essene Christian Gnosticism and 'magic' however (which includes science as necessary); DO work very well within those thought traditions.
edit on 16-12-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2015 @ 10:43 PM
link   
originally posted by: TzarChasm
originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: Ghost147

TzarChasm: Where is God's creator? Who made the watchmaker? This is where your cleverly fashioned rhetoric falls apart.

Cleverly hidden as YOU as ITS rhetorical expression tick tocks.
edit on 16-12-2015 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2015 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Ok. Fair enough. Christian mythology.



posted on Dec, 17 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: vethumanbeing

Ok. Fair enough. Christian mythology.

Or just magickal mythology.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 14  15  16   >>

log in

join