Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate
Browse by what's: hot | new | rising | top of the week

Creation, Dinosaurs, & Science with Dr. Mortenson
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Feature Presentations This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post PastorPaul2
I also would like to hear his theory on where dinosaurs went and also Hus theory on evolution from a biblical world view. Tjsnk you for being with us and I have been following you and your organization for some years now.
_________________
Fighting the good fight of faith		 Hey, DOC
Posts: 68
8/16/13 12:02 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post John Jett
PastorPaul2 wrote:
I also would like to hear his theory on where dinosaurs went and also Hus theory on evolution from a biblical world view. Tjsnk you for being with us and I have been following you and your organization for some years now.


Me too. I believe (from things I've seen before) they will refer you to the cave paintings and pottery art of dinosaurs on Peruvian art dating back only a few centuries for one.

edit - I believe those Peru (Ica) stones are considered fakes though.		 Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4955
8/16/13 12:19 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: The Key Problem in the Debate... Ventureforth
Aaron Scott wrote:
What happens is that the Creationist is usually far better prepared to hit a few key trouble spots, use that to call into questions billions of hours of scientific research, and knows how to make statements that "preach to the choir."


Quantity doesn't always equate to quality.

Quote:
All would come to the debate NOT to win debating points, but to actually find the truth.


Both creationists and evolutionists look at truth through different lenses.		 Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
8/16/13 3:01 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Ventureforth... Aaron Scott
Indeed, quantity doesn't mean quality. But at some point, the preponderance of the evidence starts making a case for itself. Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
8/16/13 5:45 pm
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: The Key Problem in the Debate... Ventureforth
The Bard wrote:
Ventureforth wrote:

Both creationists and evolutionists look at truth through different lenses.


Evolution ignores truth.

Evolution is a biological and mathematical and statistical and logical impossibility.

The concrete evidence does not support the theory. The fossil record, in fact, refutes the theory.

To be an evolutionist one must willfully and consciously ignore those truths.

That's why we may not have an intelligent discussion about evolution and why evolution will not be found in any intelligent discussion.

It's not a viable theory and will never be... despite the absurd protest that I am sure is about to take place, even here.


Just so you know, I wasn't making room for evolution. I understand many evolutionist look for evidence that supports their theory. Even those who make an attempt at objectivity, nevertheless eliminate anything supernatural. So then what are they left with? They more or less go with the most accepted theory among secular scientists. That's my take on it, anyway.
True, creationists look at the subject through a biblical world view. But some creationists would accept a naturalistic explanation to a few aspects. However, I dare say no evolutionist (except theistic evolutionists) would accept a supernatural explanation to anything.

Quote:
Indeed, quantity doesn't mean quality. But at some point, the preponderance of the evidence starts making a case for itself


Actually, I said quantity doesn't always make quality. But I agree with you, to a certain extent. I mean what the evidence says isn't always agreed upon by both sides (even among secular scientists in some cases). The other side isn't looking for evidence that supports another conclusion. So in reality, where does the preponderance of the evidence(both physical and biblical) lie? We creationists know in general, even though we may not agree on some specifics. The Old Earth position tends to align itself a little more with the evolutionists view of some of the evidence than does the Young Earth. Would you agree?

Quote:

I also would like to hear his theory on where dinosaurs went and also Hus theory on evolution from a biblical world view. Tjsnk you for being with us and I have been following you and your organization for some years now.


Hey Pastor Paul, I just happened to be watching a video on this subject the other night. I hope I'm not jumping in where I shouldn't. But this guy makes some good, thought provoking points. If you don't want to watch the whole thing you can pick it up around 3:30 for a discussion about geological layers and the thick of the dinosaur discussion starts at about 10;28. Just in case you interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDKvlWTqlMk

In any case, I'm getting concerned the doctor may not show up again. I hope he does respond, though.		 Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
8/16/13 9:46 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: The Key Problem in the Debate... Ventureforth
[quote="Ventureforth"]
The Bard wrote:
Ventureforth wrote:

Both creationists and evolutionists look at truth through different lenses.


Evolution ignores truth.

Evolution is a biological and mathematical and statistical and logical impossibility.

The concrete evidence does not support the theory. The fossil record, in fact, refutes the theory.

To be an evolutionist one must willfully and consciously ignore those truths.

That's why we may not have an intelligent discussion about evolution and why evolution will not be found in any intelligent discussion.

It's not a viable theory and will never be... despite the absurd protest that I am sure is about to take place, even here.


Just so you know, I wasn't making room for evolution. I understand many evolutionist look for evidence that supports their theory. Even those who make an attempt at objectivity, nevertheless eliminate anything supernatural. So then what are they left with? They more or less go with the most accepted theory among secular scientists. That's my take on it, anyway.
True, creationists look at the subject through a biblical world view. But some creationists would accept a naturalistic explanation to a few aspects. However, I dare say no evolutionist (except theistic evolutionists) would accept a supernatural explanation to anything.

Quote:
Indeed, quantity doesn't mean quality. But at some point, the preponderance of the evidence starts making a case for itself


Actually, I said quantity doesn't always equate to quality. But I agree with you, to a certain extent. I mean what the evidence says isn't always agreed upon by both sides (even among secular scientists in some cases). The other side isn't looking for evidence that supports another conclusion. So in reality, where does the preponderance of the evidence(both physical and biblical) lie? We creationists know in general, even though we may not agree on some specifics. The Old Earth position tends to align itself a little more with the evolutionists view of some of the evidence than does the Young Earth. Would you agree?

Quote:

I also would like to hear his theory on where dinosaurs went and also Hus theory on evolution from a biblical world view. Tjsnk you for being with us and I have been following you and your organization for some years now.


Hey Pastor Paul, I just happened to be watching a video on this subject the other night. I hope I'm not jumping in where I shouldn't. But this guy makes some good, thought provoking points. If you don't want to watch the whole thing you can pick it up around 3:30 for a discussion about geological layers and the thick of the dinosaur discussion starts at about 10;28. Just in case you interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDKvlWTqlMk

In any case, I'm getting concerned the doctor may not show up again. I hope he does respond, though.		 Acts-celerater
Posts: 651
8/16/13 10:17 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Pastors Friend
The Bard wrote:
I've read some scientists' works that absolutely destroy carbon dating and other dating methods- and have shown them all to be, unquestionably, inconsistent and unreliable. And I'm not a YEC adherent.

In Six Days: Why Fifty Scientists Choose to Believe in Creation is an excellent read and addresses the topic. Each of the chapters is written by a scientist giving his perspective from his chosen scientific field and discipline- from biology to astronomy to physics.

The language is a bit technical (as we might expect), but overall is a great read.


Could you share the ISBN with us?
PF
_________________
Lord, help me to build seats of mercy and tear down seats of judgement.		 Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1345
8/16/13 10:35 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post peterz3fo
I think most of you would be better off developing an apologetic for the resurrection of Christ, for which there is remarkable historical evidence, than the Creation/Evolution debate. Both are important, and if you have the time, be fluent in each area. But, we are not scientists! Neither are most of the people that we are engaging in conversation. We aretaking 2nd and 3rd hand talking points and trying to turn them into "gotcha" soundbytes. Make the case for the resurrection as undeniable as you can and work from there.

Authors to consider:

NT Wright has written the definitive work on the resurrection of Christ.

http://www.amazon.com/Resurrection-Christian-Origins-Question-Vol/dp/0800626796/ref=sr_sp-btf_title_2_26?ie=UTF8&qid=1376759514&sr=8-26&keywords=Gary+Habermas

Also consider works by Gary Habermas, Mike Licona, and William Lane Craig.

Craig's On Guard should already be in your library!

http://www.amazon.com/Guard-Defending-Faith-Reason-Precision/dp/1434764885/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1376759641&sr=1-1&keywords=On+Guard

My problem with groups like AnswersInGenesis is that they seem to have a take it or leave it approach. Some people will never accept that the Earth is 6,000 years old. This does not need to be the stumbling block for their salvation.		 Friendly Face
Posts: 395
8/17/13 12:16 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post dtgrant
How much simpler and precisely could God have explained His six day creation?

Genesis 1:5 (KJV)
And the evening and the morning were the first day.
Genesis 1:8 (KJV)
And the evening and the morning were the second day.
Genesis 1:13 (KJV)
And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Genesis 1:19 (KJV)
And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Genesis 1:23 (KJV)
And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
Genesis 1:31 (KJV)
And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Exodus 20:11 (KJV)
11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Exodus 31:17-18 (KJV)
17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

(donnie & terri grant)		 Friendly Face
Posts: 236
8/18/13 7:57 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post peterz3fo
Try that explanation next time you're in a conversation with a skeptic and see how far you get. Friendly Face
Posts: 395
8/18/13 10:15 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post dtgrant
Quote peterz3fo:
Quote:
Try that explanation next time you're in a conversation with a skeptic and see how far you get.


We have and the ‘next time’ we will use the Word of God when witnessing to skeptics.

That is our advantage … we have the TRUTH.
The problem lies not with the knowledge from the Word of God.
The problem lies with the skeptics lack of knowledge.
Skeptics actually have no empirical evidence of billions of years/evolution.
Skeptics accept by “FAITH” what they believe about the origins of man and the universe.

We have an example of teaching Biblical creation when witnessing to skeptics.
Acts 17:22-24 (KJV)
22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

(donnie & terri grant)		 Friendly Face
Posts: 236
8/19/13 6:38 am
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Nature Boy Florida
Dt
You are NOT being anti bible by using scientific evidence in your witness.

In fact many skeptics would appreciate that evidence as an additional reason to believe. Just as no one could find Christ's body was an additional reason to believe the disciples account that he was resurrected. I can tell you for certain that mathematics says NO to evolution.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today!

Last edited by Nature Boy Florida on 8/20/13 8:29 am; edited 1 time in total		 Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16646
8/19/13 9:44 am
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Troy Hamby
Dr T, what would you say if a skeptic quoted you this verse in response to creation being 6 literal days: II Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." Golf Cart Mafia Soldier
Posts: 2458
8/19/13 11:21 am
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post John Jett
Troy Hamby wrote:
Dr T, what would you say if a skeptic quoted you this verse in response to creation being 6 literal days: II Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."


That 6 thousand years hardly accounts for 6 BILLION ? LOL! (and I might add that I like similes too)		 Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4955
8/19/13 11:47 am
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Troy Hamby
John Jett wrote:
Troy Hamby wrote:
Dr T, what would you say if a skeptic quoted you this verse in response to creation being 6 literal days: II Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."


That 6 thousand years hardly accounts for 6 BILLION ? LOL! (and I might add that I like similes too)


i think the key words in that scripture are "is like"		 Golf Cart Mafia Soldier
Posts: 2458
8/19/13 12:13 pm
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post John Jett
Troy Hamby wrote:
John Jett wrote:
Troy Hamby wrote:
Dr T, what would you say if a skeptic quoted you this verse in response to creation being 6 literal days: II Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."


That 6 thousand years hardly accounts for 6 BILLION ? LOL! (and I might add that I like similes too)


i think the key words in that scripture are "is like"

yep, that's what makes it a simile, clearly meaning that the passage of time is pretty meaningless to an eternal God. However, Genesis 1 isn't written in first-person, nor by the writer of Peter, nor does that proof-text have anything to do with creation but to do with the inevitability of God's judgement. As for skeptics, what if the skeptic hears a bunch of half-hearted, excuses for Genesis and thinks, "wow, they don't even believe their own book, how foolish to expect me to"		 Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4955
8/19/13 12:25 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Troy Hamby
John Jett wrote:
Troy Hamby wrote:
John Jett wrote:
Troy Hamby wrote:
Dr T, what would you say if a skeptic quoted you this verse in response to creation being 6 literal days: II Peter 3:8 "But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."


That 6 thousand years hardly accounts for 6 BILLION ? LOL! (and I might add that I like similes too)


i think the key words in that scripture are "is like"

yep, that's what makes it a simile, clearly meaning that the passage of time is pretty meaningless to an eternal God. However, Genesis 1 isn't written in first-person, nor by the writer of Peter, nor does that proof-text have anything to do with creation but to do with the inevitability of God's judgement. As for skeptics, what if the skeptic hears a bunch of half-hearted, excuses for Genesis and thinks, "wow, they don't even believe their own book, how foolish to expect me to"


which is better: a bunch of half hearted excuses or dogmatic defense of an idea that does not find it's basis in any reality known by man? I understand God can defy the natural order of things but on the other hand, He also created the natural order of things, so it makes no logical sense to contradict it for no apparent reason. But hey, He's God, so i guess He can do what He wants, right?		 Golf Cart Mafia Soldier
Posts: 2458
8/19/13 12:28 pm
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post dtgrant
Quote Nature Boy Florida:
Quote:
Dt
You are being anti bible by using scientific evidence in your witness.




NBF, I’m sorry but not sure what you mean by this statement.

(donnie & terri grant)		 Friendly Face
Posts: 236
8/19/13 12:39 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post dtgrant
Quote Troy Hamby:
Quote:
which is better: a bunch of half hearted excuses or dogmatic defense of an idea that does not find it's basis in any reality known by man?




The TRUTH that is found in the Bible is always better than fallible man’s half hearted excuses and dogmatic defense of an idea (billions of years/evolution) that does not find its basis in any REALITY known by man.


(donnie & terri grant)		 Friendly Face
Posts: 236
8/19/13 12:46 pm
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Troy Hamby
dtgrant wrote:
Quote Troy Hamby:
Quote:
which is better: a bunch of half hearted excuses or dogmatic defense of an idea that does not find it's basis in any reality known by man?




The TRUTH that is found in the Bible is always better than fallible man’s half hearted excuses and dogmatic defense of an idea (billions of years/evolution) that does not find its basis in any REALITY known by man.


(donnie & terri grant)


see, that's the problem. The theory of evolution and the approximate age of the Universe is widely accepted by MOST scientist (including Christian scientists) as an established REALITY backed up by the facts as they know them. So, going by your understanding of Gen 1-3, almost every single scientist/geologist/astronomist in the world are wrong and we're right? The timeline laid out in those 3 chapters cannot POSSIBLY be allegorical and if you accept the young Earth theory, the Bible and science are completely antithetical and no compromises can be made?

And what about the Christians who accept the Bible as the TRUTH but disagree with your version of the TRUTH? Are they all in error because you hold this view and it couldn't possibly be wrong?		 Golf Cart Mafia Soldier
Posts: 2458
8/19/13 1:11 pm
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Feature Presentations This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 11, 12, 13  Next
Page 2 of 13

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.