Liberty News Forum
Political News Forum - Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. Not for wimps!
Political Opinion Page - Recent Posts - LNF Forums LNF in the Age of Empowerment!
Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Entertainment - Sports Forum
Military - A1 News Page - Computers Tech - Financial News - Bunker - Presidential Tracking Poll
The House - Off the Wall News - Page 2 - Rasmussen Reports Polls - Chat Room
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereReligion Forum › Answers in Genesis
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Answers in Genesis (Read 2,351 times)
BowHunter
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 17,430
Location: America
Joined: Dec 5th, 2013
Gender: Male
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #20 - Jul 20th, 2017 at 5:29pm
Print Post  
EF wrote on Jul 20th, 2017 at 3:55pm:
I wondered why he picked on you about this.  I have never seen express a belief either way.  I agree with your statement which I have highlighted.  I am not a lifelong Christian either (no one is, when you get right down to it, but some  have been at it longer than others by starting earlier).  Have attended church regularly.  Have NEVER heard a sermon anywhere that indicated any age of the earth whatsoever.  Which is why I don't think many of those "young earthers" really have the "courage of their convictions." 



Science and knowledge in general is not about courage. A bull may be deemed courageous but it's also an animal incredibly stupid. Its behavior is so predictable that talented bullfighters can kill this animal that's incredibly stronger, faster and heavier than they are. When it comes to science, courage is not worth shit.
  

Non sequitur:

The Hamster is at it Again wrote on Mar 2nd, 2017 at 4:30am:
... that has less power than a hair dryer used by a eunuch.



Rabbit_Reborn wrote on Feb 5th, 2017 at 5:40pm:
...that makes me a moron.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF House Leader
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
****
Offline


Posts: 8,254
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #21 - Jul 21st, 2017 at 10:12pm
Print Post  
Muckster wrote on Jul 20th, 2017 at 5:27pm:
Not to start a big discussion of the point, but the usual response to someone who says there has to be a creator, is to ask, ok then who created the creator? And if you respond No one, and can accept that, then why not accept that no one created the universe. In others words, you're allowing "no creator" to be an acceptable answer in one situation but not the other. But even when you opt for the big C Creator, that really doesn't get you anywhere. This is where Deism comes in. Ok let's just say there had to be a Creator. The best we can do beyond that is to say It kicked off the Big Bang, created some set of physical laws, and let'r rip. There's no way to go from there to the god of your bible other than to just be dogmatic about it and nothing more. Depending on your upbringing, or maybe the cultures you've been exposed to, someone who believes in a big C creator or creators just tend to go with what they've been told. Then being intelligent, like Seawolf, find ways to rationalize their particular mythology as THE story and not mythology. Buddhists do it. Hindus do it, Jews, Muslims, Christians, everybody. It's only natural to want to be special. For me personally there's nothing wrong with that UNTIL one of those groups tries to take things beyond personal belief, and impose their story on others. Then things go wrong.

And this relates to the thread discussing the founders of USA being religious. They agreed with me (he he) in thinking religion is fine as long as it's not the basis of tyranny like it was in England. That's why they sought to keep religion personal and out of the public sphere. And if you're religious, I would think you'd agree, in an opposite respect. You wouldn't want government intruding into your personal beliefs AS LONG AS YOU KEEP THEM PERSONAL. Christians seem to have a problem with that. BUt that's a different thread.

Back to you Bob...


Thanks Muck.  Here's my response:

To accept that there is a mystical, inexplicable, being that exists outside of time and space and matter requires much less suspension of disbelief than accepting that a "singularity of infinite density" existed outside of time and space exploded, thus creating time and space while flinging matter at great speeds into a nothing that is neither time nor space. 

I know it's weak analogy, but if someone walks up on a brick wall, even if he's never seen one before or even seen a wall before, he knows someone made that wall.  I believe Christopher Hitchens, whom I refer to as an almost "evangelical atheist," said that the complexity of the universe, the way things work together, is the one thing that makes him doubt his position as an atheist.  Not to the point he abandons it, but he considers that he MIGHT be wrong.

Your friend,
Bob

PS - edited to add: after reading on Hitchens just now, I am pretty sure he is not the atheist whom I quoted above.  But I read that somewhere, and it came from a well-known atheist.

PPS - might have been Christopher Buckley, who is more of an agnostic than an atheist.
« Last Edit: Jul 21st, 2017 at 10:45pm by EF »  

non sumus stulti
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BowHunter
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 17,430
Location: America
Joined: Dec 5th, 2013
Gender: Male
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #22 - Jul 22nd, 2017 at 1:39am
Print Post  
EF wrote on Jul 21st, 2017 at 10:12pm:
Thanks Muck.  Here's my response:

To accept that there is a mystical, inexplicable, being that exists outside of time and space and matter requires much less suspension of disbelief than accepting that a "singularity of infinite density" existed outside of time and space exploded, thus creating time and space while flinging matter at great speeds into a nothing that is neither time nor space. 

I know it's weak analogy, but if someone walks up on a brick wall, even if he's never seen one before or even seen a wall before, he knows someone made that wall.  I believe Christopher Hitchens, whom I refer to as an almost "evangelical atheist," said that the complexity of the universe, the way things work together, is the one thing that makes him doubt his position as an atheist.  Not to the point he abandons it, but he considers that he MIGHT be wrong.

Your friend,
Bob

PS - edited to add: after reading on Hitchens just now, I am pretty sure he is not the atheist whom I quoted above.  But I read that somewhere, and it came from a well-known atheist.

PPS - might have been Christopher Buckley, who is more of an agnostic than an atheist. 


You're not answering anything by stating that " someone made that wall". Who's made the supposed someone that "made that wall"? Once you've stated that everything that exists must have been previously made by someone, the only thing you've accomplished is starting a chain of infinite regress with no resolution whatsoever, you're replacing the probable with the impossible.

You didn't answer anything, what you've done instead is given an unstated question a ridiculous response.
  

Non sequitur:

The Hamster is at it Again wrote on Mar 2nd, 2017 at 4:30am:
... that has less power than a hair dryer used by a eunuch.



Rabbit_Reborn wrote on Feb 5th, 2017 at 5:40pm:
...that makes me a moron.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF House Leader
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
****
Offline


Posts: 8,254
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #23 - Jul 22nd, 2017 at 9:10pm
Print Post  
BowHunter wrote on Jul 22nd, 2017 at 1:39am:
You're not answering anything by stating that " someone made that wall". Who's made the supposed someone that "made that wall"? Once you've stated that everything that exists must have been previously made by someone, the only thing you've accomplished is starting a chain of infinite regress with no resolution whatsoever, you're replacing the probable with the impossible.

You didn't answer anything, what you've done instead is given an unstated question a ridiculous response.


I can't imagine why anyone think it "probable" that a "singularity of infinite density" just was, and "impossible" that an infinite being, existing outside of time and space, made it.  But to each his own.  No hard feelings on my part.
  

non sumus stulti
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BowHunter
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 17,430
Location: America
Joined: Dec 5th, 2013
Gender: Male
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #24 - Jul 23rd, 2017 at 1:33am
Print Post  
EF wrote on Jul 22nd, 2017 at 9:10pm:
I can't imagine why anyone think it "probable" that a "singularity of infinite density" just was, and "impossible" that an infinite being, existing outside of time and space, made it.  But to each his own.  No hard feelings on my part.


Children find it a lot easier to believe in fairy tales and magical beings than in hard sciences, as a matter of fact, most of them don't even understand their basic principles. That holds true for a far too large portion of the adults as well. No hard feelings, indeed, just a thick wall of incommunicability.
  

Non sequitur:

The Hamster is at it Again wrote on Mar 2nd, 2017 at 4:30am:
... that has less power than a hair dryer used by a eunuch.



Rabbit_Reborn wrote on Feb 5th, 2017 at 5:40pm:
...that makes me a moron.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Seawolf
LNF Moderator
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 20,859
Joined: Oct 31st, 2011
Gender: Male
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #25 - Jul 24th, 2017 at 7:32am
Print Post  
BowHunter wrote on Jul 23rd, 2017 at 1:33am:
Children find it a lot easier to believe in fairy tales and magical beings than in hard sciences, as a matter of fact, most of them don't even understand their basic principles. That holds true for a far too large portion of the adults as well. No hard feelings, indeed, just a thick wall of incommunicability.

Amazing that we are so foolish to speak about something we did not witness ourselves as factual, the beginning of life.  The problem is that you seem to think that science can never be wrong and yet the history of science is littered with incorrect theories throughout time.  We, ourselves are the product of something greater then ourselves because we have no control over that which created us.  If you think we are a series of accidents then very little stands in the way of exterrminating something that randomly came to life.  As quickly as we came into life, just as quick we can be snuffed out.  I agree with the fairytale anology, but in the sense that what man can not figure out he then concocts some story of how we accidently arrived, without ever witnessing the event they claim produced us.
  


"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."

Charles Carroll, signer of the DOI
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF House Leader
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
****
Offline


Posts: 8,254
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #26 - Jul 24th, 2017 at 8:27am
Print Post  
Seawolf wrote on Jul 24th, 2017 at 7:32am:
Amazing that we are so foolish to speak about something we did not witness ourselves as factual, the beginning of life.  The problem is that you seem to think that science can never be wrong and yet the history of science is littered with incorrect theories throughout time.  We, ourselves are the product of something greater then ourselves because we have no control over that which created us.  If you think we are a series of accidents then very little stands in the way of exterrminating something that randomly came to life.  As quickly as we came into life, just as quick we can be snuffed out.  I agree with the fairytale anology, but in the sense that what man can not figure out he then concocts some story of how we accidently arrived, without ever witnessing the event they claim produced us. 


I started to respond but decided not to as I resent his implication that anybody who believes in a Creator is nothing more than a child, intellectually speaking.  This is the kind of smug self-righteousness that I find off-putting whether I encounter it among believers (which I do) or non-believers (which I also do).

I fully recognize that many intelligent people can differ with me on many things.  I also admit I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.  But I also know that I am not the dullest.  I know, from having spoken with them, that there are intelligent people who accept the Genesis account as literal and, therefore, believe the earth is either 6,000 or 10,000 years old.  They are not "dumber than a pile of rocks" as one poster wrote.  I disagree with them, but I do not accuse them of being stupid.  Because I know they are not. 

Let's take it as a given that there was once a "singularity of infinite density" that exploded, an explosion so massive that its force is still hurling matter into a void that is neither time nor space, both of which were created at the moment of the explosion.  Matter, of course, was contained in that singularity.  Let's further assume that random actions resulted in the beginnings of life, and that once that begun, life became increasingly more complex through beneficial mutations, despite the fact that our own experience in this day and time seems to reveal that mutations are always bad.

We're still left with the question - from where did that singularity come?  There are two possibilities, seems to me:

It self existed. It had no life of its own, life having come later.  It just was, and it existed outside of time and space, both of which were created when it exploded.

A higher intelligence that existed outside of time, space, and matter and is therefore incomprehensible to us made it. 

I admit that both require a suspension of disbelief.  I again only ask, which requires less of it?

I don't advance this in favor of Judaism, Christianity (an offshoot of Judaism), Islam, Hindu, or any other religion as we know it.  For the purposes of my question, we can assume all are equally wrong man-made attempts to find a Creator.  But that one exists seems to me at least as possible (if not probable) that one doesn't.  Seems to be MORE possible and probable, but I will accept an admission of equality.  Bet I won't get one, though.
  

non sumus stulti
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 15,970
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #27 - Jul 24th, 2017 at 11:35am
Print Post  
EF wrote on Jul 24th, 2017 at 8:27am:
I started to respond but decided not to as I resent his implication that anybody who believes in a Creator is nothing more than a child, intellectually speaking.  This is the kind of smug self-righteousness that I find off-putting whether I encounter it among believers (which I do) or non-believers (which I also do).

I fully recognize that many intelligent people can differ with me on many things.  I also admit I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.  But I also know that I am not the dullest.  I know, from having spoken with them, that there are intelligent people who accept the Genesis account as literal and, therefore, believe the earth is either 6,000 or 10,000 years old.  They are not "dumber than a pile of rocks" as one poster wrote.  I disagree with them, but I do not accuse them of being stupid.  Because I know they are not. 

Let's take it as a given that there was once a "singularity of infinite density" that exploded, an explosion so massive that its force is still hurling matter into a void that is neither time nor space, both of which were created at the moment of the explosion.  Matter, of course, was contained in that singularity.  Let's further assume that random actions resulted in the beginnings of life, and that once that begun, life became increasingly more complex through beneficial mutations, despite the fact that our own experience in this day and time seems to reveal that mutations are always bad.

We're still left with the question - from where did that singularity come?  There are two possibilities, seems to me:

It self existed. It had no life of its own, life having come later.  It just was, and it existed outside of time and space, both of which were created when it exploded.

A higher intelligence that existed outside of time, space, and matter and is therefore incomprehensible to us made it. 

I admit that both require a suspension of disbelief.  I again only ask, which requires less of it?


I don't advance this in favor of Judaism, Christianity (an offshoot of Judaism), Islam, Hindu, or any other religion as we know it.  For the purposes of my question, we can assume all are equally wrong man-made attempts to find a Creator.  But that one exists seems to me at least as possible (if not probable) that one doesn't.  Seems to be MORE possible and probable, but I will accept an admission of equality.  Bet I won't get one, though.


Good post.

Except for the highlighted part (is that thing copyright?  Do I owe Stu some money?).


Oversimplified because small phone not proper keyboard.

Not intended to be insulting or patronising.

Your Option 2 is not less or more likely -so far as I can work out,  we don't have any way to judge.

So in a sense,  neither option would win a "which requires disbelief to be suspended higher" contest.



However,  there's a possibility that saying "God did it" can be a cop out.

I like the kind of believer who can accept such thing as evolution by taking a less literal approach to Scripture.  You aren't alone but are you in a majority?

I'd rather leave doors wedged open. Science doesn't know and may never know.

Religion doesn't know and will never know.


Science is the better option.
  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
EF
LNF House Leader
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
****
Offline


Posts: 8,254
Joined: Jan 21st, 2012
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #28 - Jul 24th, 2017 at 1:21pm
Print Post  
Limey wrote on Jul 24th, 2017 at 11:35am:
Good post.

Except for the highlighted part (is that thing copyright?  Do I owe Stu some money?).


Oversimplified because small phone not proper keyboard.

Not intended to be insulting or patronising.

Your Option 2 is not less or more likely -so far as I can work out,  we don't have any way to judge.

So in a sense,  neither option would win a "which requires disbelief to be suspended higher" contest.



However,  there's a possibility that saying "God did it" can be a cop out.

I like the kind of believer who can accept such thing as evolution by taking a less literal approach to Scripture.  You aren't alone but are you in a majority?

I'd rather leave doors wedged open. Science doesn't know and may never know.

Religion doesn't know and will never know.


Science is the better option.

If they were mutually exclusive. But they're not.
  

non sumus stulti
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BowHunter
LNF Speaker
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline


Posts: 17,430
Location: America
Joined: Dec 5th, 2013
Gender: Male
Re: Answers in Genesis
Reply #29 - Jul 24th, 2017 at 1:33pm
Print Post  
EF wrote on Jul 24th, 2017 at 8:27am:
I started to respond but decided not to as I resent his implication that anybody who believes in a Creator is nothing more than a child, intellectually speaking.  This is the kind of smug self-righteousness that I find off-putting whether I encounter it among believers (which I do) or non-believers (which I also do).

I fully recognize that many intelligent people can differ with me on many things.  I also admit I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.  But I also know that I am not the dullest.  I know, from having spoken with them, that there are intelligent people who accept the Genesis account as literal and, therefore, believe the earth is either 6,000 or 10,000 years old.  They are not "dumber than a pile of rocks" as one poster wrote.  I disagree with them, but I do not accuse them of being stupid.  Because I know they are not. 

Let's take it as a given that there was once a "singularity of infinite density" that exploded, an explosion so massive that its force is still hurling matter into a void that is neither time nor space, both of which were created at the moment of the explosion.  Matter, of course, was contained in that singularity.  Let's further assume that random actions resulted in the beginnings of life, and that once that begun, life became increasingly more complex through beneficial mutations, despite the fact that our own experience in this day and time seems to reveal that mutations are always bad.

We're still left with the question - from where did that singularity come?  There are two possibilities, seems to me:

It self existed. It had no life of its own, life having come later.  It just was, and it existed outside of time and space, both of which were created when it exploded.

A higher intelligence that existed outside of time, space, and matter and is therefore incomprehensible to us made it. 

I admit that both require a suspension of disbelief.  I again only ask, which requires less of it?

I don't advance this in favor of Judaism, Christianity (an offshoot of Judaism), Islam, Hindu, or any other religion as we know it.  For the purposes of my question, we can assume all are equally wrong man-made attempts to find a Creator.  But that one exists seems to me at least as possible (if not probable) that one doesn't.  Seems to be MORE possible and probable, but I will accept an admission of equality.  Bet I won't get one, though.


If you weren't a child you would know your limits, but you don't, you think you are qualified enough to evaluate the likelihood of a theory of which you know next to nothing (and I feel like I am being generous here, considering the stupid assumptions that you keep making). You are as arrogant as you are an ignorant. You only know of these theories through extremely simplified versions, written specifically for people like you who know nothing of the sciences. You are like a child that has been given a toy car and pretends to know everything about the real car based on the toy.

"Look I can melt this plastic car with a match and that means that the real one will melt too, in the exact same way!"

Do you understand how ridiculous your speculations are?

And that goes double for seewolf.

If you can not show a bit of restraint and stop with the insults I will delete your remarks.  There is zero reason for you behavior, Elmer has been polite with his remarks to you.  Learn how to respectfully agree to disagree without being smug and condesending. 
« Last Edit: Jul 24th, 2017 at 1:55pm by Seawolf »  

Non sequitur:

The Hamster is at it Again wrote on Mar 2nd, 2017 at 4:30am:
... that has less power than a hair dryer used by a eunuch.



Rabbit_Reborn wrote on Feb 5th, 2017 at 5:40pm:
...that makes me a moron.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereReligion Forum › Answers in Genesis

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules