"Stood forth" in 2 Pet 3 KJV is very good

[Greg Jennings]

Yet some of the best quotes about CPT (catastrophic plate tectonics) or vertical tectonics are not from Christians. I don't know about the distant universe or its age, but the 6 days and the deluge are increasingly linked together along these lines. Both geologically and culturally. There is an emormous amount of information in the world wide flood accounts, and where they are located, and why certain details reached those far locations, etc.

Just two geologic examples: the Centralia theory of Australia is now that rapid sedimentary deposit accounts for the entire center of the contintent, partially burying Ayers Rock, which is itself J shaped, ie, bent/folded. (Folding is located in many places around the world and takes huge amounts of energy, heat, water, etc.). 2, Clemens in the London geology association journal writes that granitic magmatism could produce domes like Yosemite's in as little as 5 hours. This planet has been rocked and rolled.

The reformation seems to be taking place in geology because uniformitarianism was slopped together when geology was very naive.

Pure uniformitarianism was abandoned some time ago. But that's beside the point. While there is ample evidence that large floods can dramatically alter landscapes and that they have occurred frequently throughout Earth's history, there is no evidence of a single worldwide flood outside of those brief deluges caused by impact tsunamis, and those would not have lasted long enough to cause significant landscape alterations akin to creating a new canyon.

Maybe in the future such evidences will emerge. But for now there isn't a reason to assume a worldwide flood is the reason for features that we see

 

[6days]

. But for now there isn't a reason to assume a worldwide flood is the reason for features that we see

Of course there is evidence. God's Word tell us about it.
Even evolutionists agree the whole world has been covered in water. There only argument is that it was different floods.
Funny sort of... Evolutionists are eager to believe planets such as mars (Which seems to have no liquid water) was once covered by vast oceans.... Yet, they are afraid to admit earth (Currently 2/3 water) was covered in water.
Evolutionists hate evidence which contradicts their beliefs.

 

[6days]

I'm glad you are more thick-skinned than some creationists. Truly I am.

As I pointed out previously, Mr. Silvestru did not come to his new views regarding the age of the Earth because scientific evidence told him he needed to rethink some things. In fact he says himself that scientific evidence was at odds with the Genesis creation account, and that he only changed his views because he thought he needed to in order to accommodate his new faith. At a glance it would seem that Sanford came across the same dilemma. I even remember reading about a British scientist (his name and exact field of study escapes me) who stated that even if all of the evidence available to him contradicted his belief in a 6000 year old Earth that he would still believe in a literal Genesis, which is of course is very obviously illogical.

I wouldn't consider that a ringing endorsement for the scientific accuracy of creationism, would you?

I would consider that a ringing endorsement for the absolute truth of God's Word.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Of course there is evidence. God's Word tell us about it.
Even evolutionists agree the whole world has been covered in water. There only argument is that it was different floods.
Funny sort of... Evolutionists are eager to believe planets such as mars (Which seems to have no liquid water) was once covered by vast oceans.... Yet, they are afraid to admit earth (Currently 2/3 water) was covered in water.
Evolutionists hate evidence which contradicts their beliefs.

6days we've been over this: the Bible isn't itself tangible evidence. It provides potential anecdotal evidence, but that's all.

And though I myself have never heard that Mars was "covered" in water, it has visible ice caps and liquid water. Perhaps you missed the whole liquid water on Mars thing that's been in the news?

So.....nothing there that contradicts or is even related to evolution. Why does everything come back to evolution with you?

 

[Greg Jennings]

I would consider that a ringing endorsement for the absolute truth of God's Word.

So you consider the fact that, in order to accept a literal Genesis, these scientists had to admittedly disregard what the evidence told them actually happened and instead believe that what they were studying and knew about the natural world was a pack of lies?

That's anything but a ringing endorsement for truth

 

[6days]

So you consider the fact that, in order to accept a literal Genesis, these scientists had to admittedly disregard what the evidence told .....

On the contrary. They embraced the evidence and rejected the evolutionary beliefs they had grown up with. They now acknowledge that the evidence best fits God's Word... and as geneticist Sanford says "evolytion is impossible".

 

[Greg Jennings]

On the contrary. They embraced the evidence and rejected the evolutionary beliefs they had grown up with. They now acknowledge that the evidence best fits God's Word... and as geneticist Sanford says "evolytion is impossible".

As I've pointed out to you several times, according to their own quotes the scientists only rejected what their studies showed them after conversion. And I don't know about Sanford, but in Silvestru's case he admits that the real-world evidence in no way points to creation. He admittedly believes what he does despite what the evidence tells him. All of that is on these two pages.

 

[6days]

6days we've been over this: the Bible isn't itself tangible evidence. It provides potential anecdotal evidence, but that's all.

The Bible is eye witness testimony from the only One who was there at the beginning.

As to other evidence..... all scientists from atheist to creationists examine the same evidence..... the same genetic evidence, same fossils, same DNA code, same universe Etc.

And though I myself have never heard that Mars was "covered" in water, it has visible ice caps and liquid water.

Once upon a time there was a fellow in TOL that rarely replied honestly to what had been said (straw man fallacy arguments)
I never said Mars was covered (singular) in water. What I really said was.......
"God's Word tell us about it (Global flood).
Even evolutionists agree the whole world has been covered in water. There only argument is that it was different floods.
Funny sort of... Evolutionists are eager to believe planets such as mars (Which seems to have no liquid water) was once covered by vast oceans.... Yet, they are afraid to admit earth (Currently 2/3 water) was covered in water.
Evolutionists hate evidence which contradicts their beliefs"

BTW.....
http://www.space.com/3933-mystery-solved-mars-large-oceans.html

 

[Greg Jennings]

The Bible is eye witness testimony from the only One who was there at the beginning.

As to other evidence..... all scientists from atheist to creationists examine the same evidence..... the same genetic evidence, same fossils, same DNA code, same universe Etc.

Once upon a time there was a fellow in TOL that rarely replied honestly to what had been said (straw man fallacy arguments)
I never said Mars was covered (singular) in water. What I really said was.......
"God's Word tell us about it (Global flood).
Even evolutionists agree the whole world has been covered in water. There only argument is that it was different floods.
Funny sort of... Evolutionists are eager to believe planets such as mars (Which seems to have no liquid water) was once covered by vast oceans.... Yet, they are afraid to admit earth (Currently 2/3 water) was covered in water.
Evolutionists hate evidence which contradicts their beliefs"

BTW.....
http://www.space.com/3933-mystery-solved-mars-large-oceans.html

"Covered by vast oceans" is what you said word for word. Is it not? How does "covered by water" misrepresent that? Since you've more or less called me a liar, I would very much like a response to this particular part of my post.


And I'm sorry 6days, but there is no way to verify almost everything in the Bible. Is it eyewitness testimony? Possibly. It's certainly anecdotal evidence. But that doesn't constitute proof, and you know that.

Try winning a court case using only anecdotal evidence from a book and see how far that gets you. Maybe then you'll get the point

 

[George Affleck]

I'm glad you are more thick-skinned than some creationists. Truly I am.

Not me!

I'm hurt. Cut to the quick. Truly crushed and it was you who did it.
I can't think of where exactly, but it was you! YOU!

:chuckle:

Oh... and don't call him Truly.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Not me!

I'm hurt. Cut to the quick. Truly crushed and it was you who did it.
I can't think of where exactly, but it was you! YOU!

:chuckle:

Oh... and don't call him Truly.

Lol this was a good comment. If I knew how to rep you I would

 

[6days]

Covered by vast oceans" is what you said word for word. Is it not? How does "covered by water" misrepresent that?

Can you see a difference;
A) The earth is covered with vast oceans
B) The earth is covered by water

*The word oeans (plural) implies different bodies of water... not a singular body of water. In any case.... I accept your misrepresentation was not deliberate. I apologize for implying that.*

And I'm sorry 6days, but there is no way to verify almost everything in the Bible. Is it eyewitness testimony?

Then in the same sense you can't verify Hitler wanted to exterminate Jewish people, and many other events of WW2. * In spite of overwhelming evidence, there are those who deny it.*

 

[Greg Jennings]

Can you see a difference;
A) The earth is covered with vast oceans
B) The earth is covered by water

*The word oeans (plural) implies different bodies of water... not a singular body of water. In any case.... I accept your misrepresentation was not deliberate. I apologize for implying that.*

It's fine. I overreacted a bit

Then in the same sense you can't verify Hitler wanted to exterminate Jewish people, and many other events of WW2. * In spite of overwhelming evidence, there are those who deny it.*

We have video footage, testimony from the Nazi leaders themselves, and of course the actual concentration camps, gas chambers, and burial pits that confirm the Holocaust was very real. We have no such tangible evidence for most of what the Bible says

 

[6days]

We have video footage, testimony from the Nazi leaders themselves, and of course the actual concentration camps, gas chambers, and burial pits that confirm the Holocaust was very real.

And in spite of the overwhelming evidence, there are still deniers.

We have no such tangible evidence for most of what the Bible says

Sure we do, but you deny it.

We have the overwhelming *evidence of divinely inspired scripture. We have the "appearance" of design in nature. We have eye witness testimony. We have the evidence that life only comes from life. We have the evidence that there is a *all powerful cause of everything which has existed eternally. We have the evidence that every known code has an intelligent creator..etc etc.

Its not that there isn't evidence...its that you deny it.*

 

[Greg Jennings]

And in spite of the overwhelming evidence, there are still deniers.

There are always deniers. Moon landing deniers, 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the list is endless. The common thread in each of these cases is that the people who are clearly wrong are a tiny minority

Sure we do, but you deny it.

We have the overwhelming *evidence of divinely inspired scripture. We have the "appearance" of design in nature. We have eye witness testimony. We have the evidence that life only comes from life. We have the evidence that there is a *all powerful cause of everything which has existed eternally. We have the evidence that every known code has an intelligent creator..etc etc.

Its not that there isn't evidence...its that you deny it.*

Me and everyone (that includes most Christians) who isn't a fundamentalist Christian denies it. So unlike the above examples, I am in the overwhelming majority.

You on the other hand, are the conspiracy theorist in the tiny minority. Who somehow believes that all of science is wrong and purposefully lying in order to further their cause of atheist global domination. You are the one who fits neatly into the category you tried to project onto me, ironically.

If you want to pretend that the Bible is evidence, then you can at least give me a good reason why the Koran isn't, can't you?

 

[6days]

We have the overwhelming *evidence of divinely inspired scripture. We have the "appearance" of design in nature. We have eye witness testimony. We have the evidence that life only comes from life. We have the evidence that there is a all powerful cause of everything which has existed eternally. We have the evidence that every known code has an intelligent creator..etc etc.

Its not that there isn't evidence...its that you deny it.

Me and everyone (that includes most Christians) who isn't a fundamentalist Christian denies it. So unlike the above examples, I am in the overwhelming majority.

Evolutionists think science is the shifting *popular opinion. Fortunately science is about knowledge and truth.

If we just believed majority opinion we would still think ....

*... our appendix was a useless evolutionary leftover

* ...our DNA was mostly useless "flotsam" / garbage.

*....that Neandertals were unrelated to modern humans (no interbreeding)

*...that life can come from non-life

And...we would still believe that aquired traits like my huge biceps would be passed on to my children.

Two things Christians should be thankful for:

1. Science which keeps showing us how evolutionary beliefs are false.

2. God's Word which is absolute truth and stands forever...unlike mans shifting opinions.*

 

[Greg Jennings]

Evolutionists think science is the shifting *popular opinion. Fortunately science is about knowledge and truth.

If we just believed majority opinion we would still think ....

*... our appendix was a useless evolutionary leftover

* ...our DNA was mostly useless "flotsam" / garbage.

*....that Neandertals were unrelated to modern humans (no interbreeding)

*...that life can come from non-life

And...we would still believe that aquired traits like my huge biceps would be passed on to my children.

Two things Christians should be thankful for:

1. Science which keeps showing us how evolutionary beliefs are false.

2. God's Word which is absolute truth and stands forever...unlike mans shifting opinions.*

What I'm thankful for: that people who won't accept reality can't change that reality by repeating false statements over and over again

 

[6days]

What I'm thankful for: that people who won't accept reality can't change that reality by repeating false statements over and over again

Ain't that the truth!

 

[George Affleck]

The common thread in each of these cases is that the people who are clearly wrong are a tiny minority

As a principle, I disagree.

 

[Greg Jennings]

As a principle, I disagree.

In principle you are welcome to. But in each and every example mentioned that was indeed the case