Why I believe Creation is factually accurate – The Reality!

reply to post by randyvs


Not everyone who believes in evolution rips into creationism. Many even believe in the creation. The thing is that the things that do tell you how it began can be wrong and are not proven fact so science takes it for what they are, stories.

They may have some truth to them, they may have alot or they may even be 100% true. The thing is that science just holds up the measuring stick and the stories have to be so high to get on the ride. I'm not even talking about what it would take to convince an individual. They're even harder to convince. I mean if science proved that hinduisms view of the world is the truth would you leave your faith? Yeah faith is some pretty strong stuff.

reply to post by RoguePhilosopher


In his pride the wicked does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God. Psalm 10:4


"The fool has said in his heart , There is no God" Psalm 14:1

The Devil Blinds People From the Truth...

reply to post by Faith2011


...no. You see, the Bible is going to say those sorts of things. Why? Well, the book is all about self-reinforcement. It tries to isolate itself from criticism.

The Bible also says that a dude lived in a fish's stomach for a while, a global flood happened which wiped out all life save for two of every "kind" of animal and a single family without ensuing genetic or geologic evidence, and all sorts of other ridiculous nonsense.

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by randyvs

 

Not everyone who believes in evolution rips into creationism. Many even believe in the creation. The thing is that the things that do tell you how it began can be wrong and are not proven fact so science takes it for what they are, stories.

They may have some truth to them, they may have alot or they may even be 100% true. The thing is that science just holds up the measuring stick and the stories have to be so high to get on the ride. I'm not even talking about what it would take to convince an individual. They're even harder to convince. I mean if science proved that hinduisms view of the world is the truth would you leave your faith? Yeah faith is some pretty strong stuff.

edit on 19-4-2011 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

Now how can I even have a problem with any this ? There's just noway I could. Which brings us to specifics.
People, who really want to attack all day long so they can sleep well at night or something. They want to be able to lay their heads down at night and say to themselves," yep I conviced myself again. I knew I was right". Seems to me they should spend some time praying for work.

Star for your post


Madness
Doesn't begin to describe you pal.

The Bible also says that a dude lived in a fish's stomach for a while, a global flood happened which wiped out all life save for two of every "kind" of animal and a single family without ensuing genetic or geologic evidence, and all sorts of other ridiculous nonsense.

Please dude stick to what you know which compared to your Creator ? Isn't squat. You know, the one you are going to face very soon, having no defense and still in your dirty azz garments. Clothed in all your sin that only the blood Jesus Christ could have washed away. But you were just to smart to accept. Or because of what ever head trip you gave yourself in your stubbornness. The only thing you will have to look back at then, is your absolute ignorance of the one most simple fact that ever existed.

Anything is possible?
But you continue to fool yourself.

Hi edmc –

I’m afraid my earlier observation about your lack knowledge and understanding of even the basic facts ref: the matter ‘canonicity’ of what later became the ‘Old Testament’ and also how the ‘New Testament’ camee to bee compiled (and all the various conflicting lists of books that came to be considered ‘that which defiles the hands’ and all the various textual versions and variations of those books) has been borne out again by your last post.

More’s the pity…
.
By the way, summary is ‘gist’ not ‘jest’ unless you were just trying to be ‘funny’ but this subject is truly no laughing matter, especially considering the level of ignorance on the topic by ‘believers’, most of which cannot even read the text in the original languages for themselves and yet ‘believe every word of it…’

Backing up a bit, most persons who to-day style themselves ‘Christians’ (whatever that term actually means in actual fact) are under the naive assumption that the Hebrew Scriptures (‘Jewish Bible’) is IDENTICAL to the Bible that was used by R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir [‘Jesus’ ]and the earliest Nazorean churches – at least that is what priest and ministers keep telling their sheeple every week, even though it is UN-TRUE.

This assumption has been disproved again and again and again by the re-discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Nov 1946) at Qumran (caves 1-11) and in other places nearby (Masada etc.) – ancient ‘more textually fluid’ scrolls pre-dating the Masoretic ‘canonical’ text by more than 1000 years and which were sealed up in their Caves for millennia in a kind of ‘time capsule’ back in June of AD 68 - when the Roman army was about to re-invade Judaea.

So from the ‘time capsule’ Dead Sea Scrolls, we catch a glimpse of what books the Jews of Judaea considered as their 'sacred list of books' back in the 1st century.

And that collection of texts DOES NOT match what Jews and Christians read to-day in their modern bibles – which can be shown by a close reading of texts in question and also by re-examining the words placed into the mouth of the Greek speaking ‘Iesous’ in the ‘canonical’ gospels..

Anyone who denies the facts in the above two paragraphs is either

a. Not conversant with the actual facts of the matter
b. A liar

This is one of the main reasons why the Vatican under the auspices of the Ecole Biblique (and the Jewish Rebbes as well, who did not want the world to know their supposedly ancient and ‘holy’ texts were so ‘textually corrupt and fluid’ in antiquity) that they did NOT want the 'Dead Sea Scrolls' published for the masses – and only in our computerised age did these texts actually get leaked out to the general public (between 1946 and 1986 only the ‘harmless texts’ were published for the masses; scrolls that cast doubts on the authenticity of the much later Masoretic pointed text or that were shown to be too close to the more racist / seditionistic words of ‘Iesous’ in the gospels

(e.g. when addressing the gentile SyroPhoenecian woman who camee to him for help, he retorts “the Bar Enasha was sent ONLY to the Elect of the Lost Sheep of the House of Yisroel” and ‘anyway, since when is it right to take the children’s bread out of their mouths and throw it to the dogs under the table?…’ in Matt chapter 15, where ‘dogs’ in the dead sea scrolls is a code word for ‘unclean idolatrous gentiles’, a term found in the later Talmudic literature as well) were suppressed and not published until copies were snuck out

NB: Fierce legal battles followed in the US, UK and Israel as a result of the leaks (prior to their limited release to scholars in 1991)

These cave scrolls had to be kept from the prying eyes of the general public because scholars noticed right away that lying side by side there were TWO or MORE versions of the same books (e.g. Scroll of the Book of the Prophet Isaiah,1Q-IsA which priests and ministers & Rebbes like to shout to the rooftops that is the same as their modern Masoretic version – deliberately overlooking that there was a wholly DIFFERENT consonantal text version of Isaiah – BOTH lying right next to it in the self-same cave the so-called scroll of Isaiah 1Q-IsB which is different by approx 18% counting letters in each column exactly. So there is not even a SINGLE version of the same book to deal with !

And the LIST of books that Jews considered canonical (and used as proof texts) can be seen by examining a collection that was sealed up a full 32 years AFTER the execution of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef for armed sedition against the state (breach of Lex Maestatis, the socalled No King but Caesar Law): we now have a clearer physical glimpse as to what scriptures were read and considered ‘canonical’ by Judaeans of the 1st century AD, even though the much smaller list of books was voted upon by the Concil of Javneh in Palestine 20 years AFTER the Romans destroyed Eretz Yisro’el, which added books like ESTHER and took out books like I Henoch and the Testament of the 12 (yet the Coptic Churches kept BOTH of these texts in THEIR ‘canonical bible’ for more than 1500 years)

We can also see that books ‘in the Palestinian Hebrew Scriptures Time Capsule’ of Caves 1-11 at Qumran show that e.g. the Scroll of 1 Henoch (The Scroll of the Book of the Words of Henoch son of Jared to all the Sons of Light in the Last Days) were actively being quoted ‘as proof text scripture’ (i.e. canonical OT) by the writer of say, Jude in the so-called New Testament, and is a text which R. Yehoshua bar Yosef and Yohanon bar Zechariah (‘John the Baptist’) certainly knew and from which quoted freely 'as scripture'...

For a quick example, (there are dozens in the NT), see Jude 1:14-17 which quotes the text from some of the opening verses of 1 Henoch ( ‘as scripture’)

This citation proves beyong any doubt that the 'canon' of the earliest ‘Christians’ contained the Scroll of I Henoch (like the Coptic christian communities in Alexandria) - and that their 'bible' as a set of 'sacred scriptures' to use a proof texts were NOTthe same as the later Christian canon used by Protestants to-day..

Also the so-called Church Fathers (esp from AD 80 to AD 280) quoted I Henoch and other non-canonical OT Jewish ‘non-canonical’ books as Scripture (as well as a lot of sayings of ‘Jesus’ not found in any modern Bibles!) which also ddisproves any idea that the ‘modern bible’ is the same as it was 2000 years ago.

In fact, the ‘Old Testament’ was still very much in flux in the time of ‘Jesus’ (pre-Javneh, AD 90) and there was absolutely no fixed canon of Scripture during the so-called Apostolic period. What ‘Jesus’ considered scripture and what ‘Christians’ considered ‘scripture’ were different lists of books ‘that defiled the hands’ and also different VERSIONS of the books themselves.

Don't tell me all of this is news to you ? Ouch !!

The book of Enoch and Jude do have a similar (if not almost identical) reference. This however, in no way proves that Jude "believed Enoch to be inspired".

Enoch is generally thought to have been written between the first and second centuries, BC.

Perhaps there was a well known Jewish legend or book that had writings of Enoch. Perhaps the writer of the book of Enoch used this source, as did Jude. And as long as the statement was accurate, this was not a big deal. There is no proof that Jude "quoted from Enoch". Very possible that they both quoted from the exact same statement that we know was actually made by Enoch (because Jude quotes it!)

Either the bible is God's word or it's not.

If it is God's Word, than he would have made sure the book of Enoch was included in the Canon for all to read. Since it's not, it's safe to assume that it is not part of what God wants to be included in the bible.

If the bible is not God's word, then all books have equal significance whether they are in the canon or not.

Also, Sigismundis, the fact that early writers quote many things that Jesus said that aren't in the bible is of no concern.

Obviously every word that Jesus spoke was not recorded in the bible.

I'm sure John was close friends (as he lived until almost the year 100 AD) with many of the early christians, and he probably told them many things that Jesus said that weren't actually in the bible.

reply to post by randyvs

Please dude stick to what you know which compared to your Creator ? Isn't squat. You know, the one you are going to face very soon, having no defense and still in your dirty azz garments. Clothed in all your sin that only the blood Jesus Christ could have washed away. But you were just to smart to accept. Or because of what ever head trip you gave yourself in your stubbornness. The only thing you will have to look back at then, is your absolute ignorance of the one most simple fact that ever existed.

Given that there's zero objective evidence supporting your claim I doubt Madness is shacking in his boots

You on the other hand should try to be good or mighty Santa will take you to the North Pole

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


The Bible is self-authenticating and self-attesting; it does not rely on the human recipients to validate it. Yet sinful man continues to twist and corrupt what God has revealed – this should not surprise us, as He told us this has happened and will continue to happen.
.

reply to post by Faith2011


And you have...wait for it....waaaaaaaait for it......waaaaaaaaaaaait for it....ZERO evidence for your claims. All you're doing is preaching

reply to post by MrXYZ

You on the other hand should try to be good or mighty Santa will take you to the North Pole

Imagine my best Maxwell Smart for this one.

Yes well, what is it they say at KAOS? Sin by day, pray by night, forgiven by morning? Or is it pray by day ?
Sorry about that chief.

reply to post by MrXYZ


This is especially true of those who follow the corrupt desire of the sinful nature and despise authority. Bold and arrogant, these men are not afraid to slander celestial beings;2 Peter 2:10

Fear God... And keep His commandments, for this is man's all. For God will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil. (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)



For, He "will render to each one according to his deeds:" eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness - indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil. (Romans 2:6-9; see also Acts 17:30)

Click here for more information.

'Scientists presents Proof of Intelligent Design ! Charles Darwin - Origin of Species - Evolution Disproved"

Intelligent Design proved by - Biologists, Scientists from Cambridge, Chicago, Munchen - debating and refuting Evolution Theory ! Scientists presents Proof of Intelligent Design ! Charles Darwin - Origin of Species - Disproved, Refuted by Biologists and Scientists !

Creation proved by Scientists !

Please watch all parts of this movie:

Scientists presents Proof of Intelligent Design ! Charles Darwin - Origin of Species - Evolution Disproved

Part 2 Intelligent Design proved by - Biologists, Scientists from Cambridge, Chicago, Munchen - debating and refuting Evolution Theory ! Scientists presents Proof of Intelligent Design ! Charles Darwin - Origin of Species - Disproved, Refuted by Biologists and Scientists !

Creation proved by Scientists !

Please watch all parts of this movie:

reply to post by Faith2011

Originally posted by Faith2011
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

 

The Bible is self-authenticating and self-attesting; it does not rely on the human recipients to validate it.

So you just admitted that your argument is a circular argument? I'm sorry, but no document is self-authenticating or self-attesting, that's just a ridiculous idea. The Qu'ran makes the exact same claim, as do most other religious texts. Of course, they don't. Nothing is self-authenticating because circular logic is fallacious.

Yet sinful man continues to twist and corrupt what God has revealed – this should not surprise us, as He told us this has happened and will continue to happen.

...except...no. Just no. Just because a document claims that people will disagree with it doesn't mean that the document is correct.

reply to post by Faith2011


reply to post by Faith2011



*Le sigh*

...neither of these prove intelligent design. And hell, why are they making videos instead of publishing peer reviewed scientific papers? Why aren't they participating in the academic discourse? I'll tell you why: because they don't want to. Answersingenesis and their ilk want to force change in the scientific community by deceiving well-meaning religious folk like yourself who don't know the first thing about science.

reply to post by randyvs

Originally posted by randyvs
Madness
Doesn't begin to describe you pal.

Wow, petty insults.

The Bible also says that a dude lived in a fish's stomach for a while, a global flood happened which wiped out all life save for two of every "kind" of animal and a single family without ensuing genetic or geologic evidence, and all sorts of other ridiculous nonsense.

Please dude stick to what you know which compared to your Creator ? Isn't squat.

At least I know proper punctuation. And at least I can do one thing that this supposed creator can't validate my existence independently to a reasonable standard.

You know, the one you are going to face very soon, having no defense and still in your dirty azz garments.

Ah, so this is just going to be a preaching bit, you're just going to ignore what I'm saying to basically go with the "YOU WILL BE JUDGED FOR YOUR SINS AND ONLY THE BLOOD OF JESUS WILL WASH THEM AWAY" angle?

Clothed in all your sin that only the blood Jesus Christ could have washed away.

Yep, knew you were going there. You know, I don't lose any sleep over this. Just like you don't lose any sleep over whether or not you're defying Allah.

But you were just to smart to accept. Or because of what ever head trip you gave yourself in your stubbornness. The only thing you will have to look back at then, is your absolute ignorance of the one most simple fact that ever existed.

No such thing as the simplest fact ever. And if your religious claim were such a simple fact then where is the means by which it can be validated and tested?

Anything is possible?
But you continue to fool yourself.

Well, plenty of things are within the realm of possibility...yet you providing an actual response of content instead of a fire and brimstone speech doesn't seem to be one of them.

Any response Sigismundis?

Many times atheists, agnostics, or just plain bible skeptics come into threads and drop long posts full of "proofs" that the bible is a sham or the canon is inaccurate, etc.

They obviously have copied this info from their favorite "religion teacher" or "atheist website".

And just as sure as believers believe that their bible is true, these atheists are 100% convinced that the bible is not true.

I'd like to discuss just this ONE issue, that of Jude "quoting from the book of enoch", and specifically, your claim that this PROVES that the book of Enoch was supposed to be "canon".

My earlier post shows my refutation of your statement to that effect, and I'll continue awaiting your reply.

madnessinmysoul,

Religious belief is not anything that is currently a "fact" or can be "proven" to the standards you are requiring. No more than evolution from the big bang to what we see here can be proven by normal scientific standards or the usual scientific method. We both know we are here, and we both obviously have different opinions as to how we got here.

You are sure that we evolved over millions of years from tiny cells to humans, and I am sure God created humans separately.

You use DNA "evidence" (similarity of man and chimps), fossil "evidence" to stake your claims. We use the bible to stake our claims.

Our way may seem foolish to you, just as your way seems foolish to me.

Neither side can "prove" anything beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Faith is what all christians have. However faith is not something that will last forever. Faith is only faith until the realities that are "hoped for" actually occur. If that occurs as the bible says it will, then you will have your "evidence" at that time.

If you are correct, than we will all die and our conversations over this matter in the long run were quite trivial and accomplished nothing.

But expecting those that believe in God to furnish you with definitive, physical proof is something you won't get from them at this time, so why bother? I never figured this one out. Why evolutionists cling to these types of discussions. If I believed as you did, I wouldn't waste a single second of my life on these types of issues. Why do so many cling to it with such passion and animosity (in many cases)?