Ask a Young Earth Creationist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-05-2011, 03:56 AM
 
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(02-05-2011 07:19 PM)Glaucus Wrote:  But shouldn't scientific knowledge be separated from someone's "world view," in the sense that no matter what you believe, the laws of physics still apply to you?
Good question, but I would counter “Do you really believe that Science is separated from anyone’s worldview? Isn’t it really quite naïve to believe this “pretended neutrality”? Don’t we all have our presuppositions that we carry into our opinions on everything?

(02-05-2011 07:19 PM)Glaucus Wrote:  Another common argument against creationism that I've heard (and used) is which creation should be accepted?
I have heard this exact same argument used against the materialistic “creation” stories such as abiogenesis. Some have even attempted to argue that abiogenesis is a fact.


(02-05-2011 07:19 PM)Glaucus Wrote:  The Genesis account goes against the Hopi creation story, which goes against the Greek, which goes against the Australian Aborigine, etc.

Which goes against every atheistic creation story/hypothesis as well; which begs its own set of questions.
(02-05-2011 07:19 PM)Glaucus Wrote:  I find it difficult to grasp how one can say that their creation model, while using very similar arguments to anyone else would claim that theirs was also true. If the Theory of Evolution and the Big Bang are found to be wrong, that doesn't make the Judeo-Christian creation model anymore correct than any other religion's creation model. Though, it is something that should be considered when promoting one creation model over another.
The merits of the arguments, in-and-of themselves, as they stand or fall, definitely do not necessarily lend credence to the other arguments. Each one will stand alone on their own truth-claims.
Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 04:02 AM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
@ ikester7579

My question was not intended for you, it was for the author of this thread, who appears to be intelligent and polite person. And I am not mad at anyone, I am asking a question. You my friend, have obviously missed my point by 100%. I didn't say "we" own anything, and you do have the same rights as anyone else, but WHY do you seek evidence and why are you looking for proofs if you are a BELIEVER? Do you understand the concept of that word?

[Image: a6505fe8.jpg]
I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours.
-Hunter S. Thompson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 05:31 AM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
@ikester7579
To be honest my questions were for spectre , but ...
Quote:Yes, Because I choose to.
Does that make it true and reliable in your mind , or is it just your opinion just as someone else may choose to believe the Koran or neither the Bible nor the Koran ?

The Occam's Razor part was actually very important. It states that out of two hypothesis the one that makes the fewest assumptions is the best one.

Atheism is a religion like OFF is a TV channel !!!

Proud of my genetic relatives Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 08:10 AM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 03:30 AM)ikester7579 Wrote:  
(03-05-2011 01:07 AM)Tim_Kiebooms Wrote:  
(02-05-2011 03:51 PM)Spectre Wrote:  
(02-05-2011 02:58 PM)Tim_Kiebooms Wrote:  But what i meant with almighty is: capable of doing "anything". Like the many miracles that have occurred according to (literal interpretation of) the bible. For example if He can move aside the water so that Moses can cross the sea, then he should also be able to keep a Tsunami from getting to Japan if you know what i mean.

Also with "your" God i merely meant the God you believe in.
Sure he could prevent the tsunami from hitting Japan. Yes, I believe he is capable of all miracles as described in The Bible. I figured your question was going in that direction. Wink

Okay, if He's capable of doing this scale of miracles, he should also be able to alter a person's brain, and therefor ridding him of any evil thoughts, correct?

There are quite a number of diseases that change a person's personality dues to the damage caused to the brain. Personality change is logically connected to a different way of thinking (because altering that what makes you think, would make you think differently), a new way of thinking causes a new way of action (the differences can be huge). So if God bases his judgments based on your actions and thoughts, wouldn't that indirectly mean he's judging you based on your brain?

There is the matter of freewill. A person cannot be responsible for actions he had a no freewill choice in. If the person is mentally ill, has a chemical imbalance in the brain, then they would be considered innocent and here's why:

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

If good cannot be comprehended because of a mental condition, then evil cannot be defined either. So the person does not knoweth to do good, so it's not a sin. The only choices a person can be judge on are freewill choices. Because freewill choices only point to the person who made them. They cannot be blamed on a condition, or another person.

Well actually my statement was that if personality and choice of action are part of the brain. Since deceases can radically change them, that would mean they're material and therefor not part of the soul. This would mean that God's judgment is based on your brain.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 09:25 AM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 03:56 AM)Ron Wrote:  Good question, but I would counter “Do you really believe that Science is separated from anyone’s worldview? Isn’t it really quite naïve to believe this “pretended neutrality”? Don’t we all have our presuppositions that we carry into our opinions on everything?

Indeed we do. I know that I personally have used science to build my world view. But that's why people submit their papers for review by other scientists. The idea being that, while a few other scientists may share your views/bias, the majority will be more concerned with finding out what is true, and will critique an argument that is heavily burdened by personal bias.

Now I'm expecting you to counter with something along "the scientific community has a bias of it's own, and won't let anyone who is a follower of Christ submit papers." So I'd like to address that now before it goes much further.

According to a pew research poll from 2009, approximately ~33% of all scientists have a belief in a personal deity. The article breaks down the percentages into gender, age groups, and field, with Chemistry leading the pack with 41% believers against 39% non-believers. Here is the article if you're interested in it. As I have heard many creationists say, and a few topics on your site discuss, the assumption that being religious excludes you from science, or that secular science won't allow creation science it, seems just plain ridiculous. It seems more than likely to be the result of the Creation side suffering from not enough evidence or too many unjustifiable assumptions, rather than a bias in the scientific community.

On a side note, have any papers on creation been submitted to a scientific journal? If you have links, I'd love to read them.

(03-05-2011 03:56 AM)Ron Wrote:  The merits of the arguments, in-and-of themselves, as they stand or fall, definitely do not necessarily lend credence to the other arguments. Each one will stand alone on their own truth-claims.

I'm hoping to address this point in another topic regarding the value of using any holy book as a source, or as the foundation of an argument. I'll try to start the topic tonight, but with finals just around the corner I'm pretty busy, so I may not have the time to properly form a starting argument tonight.

Of all the ideas put forth by science, it is the principle of Superposition that can undo any power of the gods. For the accumulation of smaller actions has the ability to create, destroy, and move the world.

"I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul." -W. E. Henley
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 11:25 AM (This post was last modified: 03-05-2011 11:32 AM by Glaucus.)
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 03:30 AM)ikester7579 Wrote:  I dish what is dished to me, if you guys cannot take it don't dish it.

I'm not sure if you're dodging the question, or simply just not aware one was asked. Could you justify your logic in your previous posts?
How would one empirically prove that Time - Sin = Eternity, or any of the other assumptions made on the FAQ about Eternity link you gave us?

If your responses are going to continue to be simple one line insults ("That was lame, nice try though" an the one above), then I was right to question the morality of certain admins on your forum. And I would also be justified to claim that you are just as uninterested in opposing viewpoints, as you claim us to be. The difference being, there is no censorship of civilized dissenters here (using your tactics, i would've probably been banned from your site, rather than put "under moderator review"). So please, your complaints against us are simply, and blatantly, hypocrisies.

But that last paragraph is just food for thought, what I'd really like you to address is the questions I posted before it.

Of all the ideas put forth by science, it is the principle of Superposition that can undo any power of the gods. For the accumulation of smaller actions has the ability to create, destroy, and move the world.

"I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul." -W. E. Henley
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 11:39 AM (This post was last modified: 03-05-2011 11:48 AM by Spectre.)
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
(03-05-2011 02:24 AM)gaglamesh731 Wrote:  @spectre
1.Do you believe the Bible word for word ? If so , why ?
2.Would you force your beliefs on others ?
3.Which denomination of Christianity is true ?
4.Do you respect Occam's Razor ?
1. Yes, it is the inspired Word of God.

2. No.

3. The only thing that is certainly true is The Bible. I have never went to any church where I agreed with all of the sermons, no matter which denomination.

4. No, it's just a philosophy.


(03-05-2011 03:28 AM)Filox Wrote:  OK, so I started reading this thread but I just couldn't. Sorry, too many unlogical things... First I was surprised when I saw a YEC coming here to talk. The thing that I can not understand is how and why do you constantly have to mix science with religion and you beliefs. The concept you Creationists don't understand is that your beliefs are just that BELIEFS. You BELIEVE in God and in Bible, you don't NEED evidence for your beliefs, you do not need science to prove you that you are correct. Religion and science are not to be mixed, one is based on pure evidence and research, other is based on human beliefs in supernatural (God for you). So my question would be why? Why do you constantly push your "science" in front of everything else? Is it because you lack true belief in the Word of God, or you just lack the belief in Creationist Word of God? Because, if you were "true believer", you would not need any evidence, nor would you ever argue with anyone about the facts and proofs for your Bible theories...
I freely admit that YEC is a religion, but Science can be used to validate The Bible's claims. You may ask, why should we use Science if we are so certain about God? It is because some people need more than a book to believe. And I mean, if secular science claimed to invalidate The Bible's claims, why would we not take a look at it ourselves? It wouldn't be very logical if we did would it? I see where you are coming from, but I suspect that because you may not like religion, that you aren't trying to consider what it is like to be religious. Pushing my science in front of others? The Bible is my first authority, but Creationists have done some research, and made predictions based on the claims of The Bible and they were validated.(Indeed, in the predictions, they started with The Bible and that is what caused their predictions to be accurate in the first place.) Such as Dr. Humphrey's model for the magnetic fields of Uranus and Neptune. God is untestable, but The Bible certainly is testable. Smile

"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" Peter 3:15

http://www.answersforhope.org
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 12:13 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
Quote:1) It was not us who came here looking for debate, it was members from here who came to troll our forum

I am sorry but none of us trolled the http://www.evolutionfairytale.com forum. If some posts of mine on that forum fell into the category of trolling for you , just quote them (possibly into a new thread) and I will be glad to explain myself.
Quote:How can you empirically prove other dimensions don't exist?

The real question is of course 'how can you prove they exist?', anyway extra dimensions are a major issue for nowadays physics. The math of string theory suggest that there are 10 dimensions, of which 6 is curved into being really small. Of course this is only speculation, but actually it could be proved at extremely high energies in particle colliders such as the ones in CERN or Fermilab. So even though your question was intended to be rhetorical, the question of extra dimensions could be settled if we could build large-enough colliders.

..."we can be truly free - not because we can rebel against the the tyranny of the selfish replicators but because we know that there is no one to rebel."
Susan Blackmore : The Meme Machine
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 12:21 PM
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
^^ That is why I am interested in going to school for physics.

"But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" Peter 3:15

http://www.answersforhope.org
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-05-2011, 02:28 PM
 
RE: Ask a Young Earth Creationist
There is something I want to make clear before getting too far into this (and I haven't read the rest of the follow up posts in this thread yet, I don't have the time to do that right now) :

Your goal should not be to explain how, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary, there is a possible way that this one explanation could be correct. That's obvious, there will always be a way to modify or interpret the idea of Creationism to fit with any evidence provided against it. But that same method could be used for any claim one wishes to make, whether it's that I happen to be a psychic or that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the Earth yesterday.

I am not accusing you of doing this, at least not yet. But it's something to keep in mind during the discussion. The reasonable way to approach the claim of Creationism is to take the default position(which would be not accepting it) and then see if there is enough evidence to support the claim and not enough to refute it or make it too unlikely to consider over another explanation. And arguing against a skeptical approach will not get you anywhere, you would apply the skepticism that I am applying to your claim when considering any other extraordinary claim that you do not accept(Such as the examples above, Islam, Scientology, etc.)

So, as long as we're on the same page, I am more than happy to discuss this. If you disagree with a skeptical approach, however, I don't know what to say. Apply a lack of skepticism to every other claim you reject and tell me why you still reject some of them. Or just explain why skepticism should not be applied to this particular claim and yet be applied to other ideas. I really don't mean to beat this to death, but I want to make sure it isn't an issue that's going to crop up after this point Smile

Now that that's out of the way, you quoted this in answer to the other post I made here so I'll respond. If you've already replied to any issue I raise, I'll get to it when I catch up on this thread or you can quote it in response if you feel inclined to do so.

(02-05-2011 08:13 PM)ikester7579 Wrote:  Starlight problem has to do with the difference in the laws Of physics I talked about in my other post in this thread. Time without sin is eternal so therefore eternal laws apply during creation.
I have a problem with this. I don't know of any basis for the statement "time without sin is eternal". That is something that needs to be proven or somehow evidenced before it is assumed.

After reading the rest of what you said, I understand that you're explaining some of the many possible ways that creation could have happened and not contradict anything we know today. I accept that it is possible to make it fit into all of our current knowledge. But that isn't what you need to do to persuade someone who is skeptical, as I explained above. Debating what you posted is not going to get us anywhere.

In that case, I guess my real question to you, Spectre, or whoever else is arguing for YEC in this topic is: Do you have an argument that begins without any assumptions that one would not make if they were taking a skeptical approach, or does your entire position rely on abandoning skepticism and accepting assumptions about the existence of God, the way the Earth was created, etc.?

This is the only practical way to approach the issue(In my opinion). Start with facts that anyone can accept, and show what evidence supports your position. Addressing particular perceived inconsistencies with the Creationism argument will get everybody nowhere, and just leave everyone debating about minor points instead of looking at the big picture.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: