Total Posts:150|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Planet Creation

Notamoron
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 3:34:01 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Interesting article...Sally. ;-)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.
bulproof
Posts: 25,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 1:15:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form,
Yes we do, it's the godbotherers who claim that their invisible friend created them all in one day.
And yes we know that is f*ckin' ridiculous.
dee-em
Posts: 6,481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 1:20:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

But many of your fellow Christians do indeed believe that God created the Earth and the heavens in six days. Furthermore, a literal interpretation of Genesis has been prevalent throughout the vast majority of the history of Christianity. A non-literal interpretation is a relatively modern development which has only emerged in response to scientific falsification of the biblical account. First Christians took it deadly seriously as being literal. Now it is to be taken as mere imagery. The Bible is anything Christians want it to be depending on shifting circumstances.
bulproof
Posts: 25,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 1:33:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.
I love this explanation, it declares for all that god's bloody sacrifice of his son for the redemption of Adam's sin is either a lie or unnecessary.
Notamoron
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 2:34:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

You're talking about god as an objective thing yet this process is something which doesn't require a god, you have to admit that regardless of the standpoint you take. You proceed to develop your own interpretation and once again treat it likes it's objectively right. Treating it as such is supernatural contradictory to your claim of logic.
The simple insinuation that a god is currently responsible for this process delves into the supernatural which is entirely contradictory to everything you've just said.....You're making claim of a conscious being which cannot be seen in the natural world yet interacts with it.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 4:17:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

Do you ever actually read what you write? You keep telling us your beliefs, religion, spirits, gods, etc. are all part of the supernatural realm, that they cannot "BY THEIR VERY NATURE" be studied by science, and now you're telling us that your God creates planets and physics via "a logical scientific process".

Seriously, can you be any more hypocritical and contradictory?

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would.

Can you contradict yourself even more? I think you can.

Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

So, now it's an idea? LOL. Wow, your claims and delusion are all over the map, totally scatter-brained.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2015 6:40:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

I particularly like the way you make specific claims that you know what God did and didn't do, what the Bible actually means, despite having no evidence of Gods existence, no knowledge or even revelatory text that you can draw from to make that claim.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2015 12:49:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 1:15:50 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form,
Yes we do, it's the godbotherers who claim that their invisible friend created them all in one day.
And yes we know that is f*ckin' ridiculous.

Really, yet I've seen you in all the discussions where we say otherwise now don't I?
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2015 12:59:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 1:20:15 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

But many of your fellow Christians do indeed believe that God created the Earth and the heavens in six days. Furthermore, a literal interpretation of Genesis has been prevalent throughout the vast majority of the history of Christianity. A non-literal interpretation is a relatively modern development which has only emerged in response to scientific falsification of the biblical account. First Christians took it deadly seriously as being literal. Now it is to be taken as mere imagery. The Bible is anything Christians want it to be depending on shifting circumstances.

Literal/non literal are irrelevant.
Idea-a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. The aim or purpose.
The creation model is an idea, the aim and purpose is to create a simple concept, it never was supposed to be scientific data, nowhere does it claim to be. That does not make it false, ideas can contain truth or literal expressions.
Are you going to tell me you do not see the imagery in Genesis such as saying "God said let there be light", or "from the dust of the ground God formed Adam", or God did this or that on "day one", though the statements contain truth it is merely a picture. Also there are layered meanings and symbolic overtones, that is quite common in scripture.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2015 1:10:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 1:33:52 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.
I love this explanation, it declares for all that god's bloody sacrifice of his son for the redemption of Adam's sin is either a lie or unnecessary.

We are discussing the creation account (that's Genesis ch. 1), not the sins of Adam or mankind. As usual you need to make up little lies to create any traction, get a life.

Sinful nature and mans mistakes are obvious, that shouldn't even be up for debate.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2015 1:47:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 4:17:03 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

Do you ever actually read what you write? You keep telling us your beliefs, religion, spirits, gods, etc. are all part of the supernatural realm, that they cannot "BY THEIR VERY NATURE" be studied by science, and now you're telling us that your God creates planets and physics via "a logical scientific process".

How else would God create our universe nitwit? how does anyone create anything?? why would God be any different?? God is a conscious Being who can THINK, if you can't think and you can't use logic/reason you can't create!
God is a Spirit, that's already understood....God creates the physical universe, that's already understood so what we have is this....
A Spiritual Entity (God) created (put together) the natural/material world, hence we have physics lol, anything else?

Seriously, can you be any more hypocritical and contradictory?

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would.

Can you contradict yourself even more? I think you can.

Yes because this is not contradictory, you just have comprehension problems. Can you explain how God creates minus all the attributes it takes to create lol?

Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

So, now it's an idea? LOL. Wow, your claims and delusion are all over the map, totally scatter-brained.

Idea-a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. The aim or purpose.

Simple stuff scatter-brain, anything else?
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2015 1:53:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 2:34:58 PM, Notamoron wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

You're talking about god as an objective thing yet this process is something which doesn't require a god, you have to admit that regardless of the standpoint you take. You proceed to develop your own interpretation and once again treat it likes it's objectively right. Treating it as such is supernatural contradictory to your claim of logic.
The simple insinuation that a god is currently responsible for this process delves into the supernatural which is entirely contradictory to everything you've just said.....You're making claim of a conscious being which cannot be seen in the natural world yet interacts with it.

Atheism says it doesn't require a God not science, there is a difference. We're simply observing what a Spiritual God designed and set in motion. We can't see "spirits" (with material eyes anyway) but we can see what God creates in the physical realm obviously. In other words even if God exists (which He does) you wouldn't see Him creating, you would only see the results, and that is what we study via science.

There is no contradiction about a Spirit creating the physical world. God created the material dimension He knows how to put it together and how it operates lol. He is the source of all that we observe.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,097
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2015 2:19:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

wow you seem keen to trust what someone else has told you to be true and remember that being "science" that can all change in no time at all...

good to see your level of faith though even if it is something fallible...
dee-em
Posts: 6,481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 12:25:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/30/2015 12:59:17 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 1:20:15 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

But many of your fellow Christians do indeed believe that God created the Earth and the heavens in six days. Furthermore, a literal interpretation of Genesis has been prevalent throughout the vast majority of the history of Christianity. A non-literal interpretation is a relatively modern development which has only emerged in response to scientific falsification of the biblical account. First Christians took it deadly seriously as being literal. Now it is to be taken as mere imagery. The Bible is anything Christians want it to be depending on shifting circumstances.

Literal/non literal are irrelevant.

Of course you would say that because you don't want to face up to the fact that this is a very late change in Christian interpretation. A century or so ago you and your fellow Christians would have been insisting that the Garden of Eden was a real place and Adam and Eve were created from dust and a rib. We now know these kinds of claims are nonsense and you have had to change your tune.

Idea-a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. The aim or purpose.
The creation model is an idea, the aim and purpose is to create a simple concept, it never was supposed to be scientific data, nowhere does it claim to be. That does not make it false, ideas can contain truth or literal expressions.

The Bible, and Genesis in particular, makes specific claims. These claims can and have been scientifically tested and have been found wanting. In light of that, Christians now seek to distance themselves from those claims. They didn't in the past but today it is just plain embarrassing. Therefore we now have talk of "ideas" and "imagery", the usual apologetics to try and sweep the problem under the carpet.

Are you going to tell me you do not see the imagery in Genesis such as saying "God said let there be light", or "from the dust of the ground God formed Adam", or God did this or that on "day one", though the statements contain truth it is merely a picture. Also there are layered meanings and symbolic overtones, that is quite common in scripture.
dee-em
Posts: 6,481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 12:35:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/30/2015 12:59:17 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 1:20:15 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

But many of your fellow Christians do indeed believe that God created the Earth and the heavens in six days. Furthermore, a literal interpretation of Genesis has been prevalent throughout the vast majority of the history of Christianity. A non-literal interpretation is a relatively modern development which has only emerged in response to scientific falsification of the biblical account. First Christians took it deadly seriously as being literal. Now it is to be taken as mere imagery. The Bible is anything Christians want it to be depending on shifting circumstances.

Are you going to tell me you do not see the imagery in Genesis such as saying "God said let there be light", or "from the dust of the ground God formed Adam", or God did this or that on "day one", though the statements contain truth it is merely a picture.

Yes, that's what you say today when science has invalidated a literal interpretation. You have no other choice but to relegate the Bible to poetry.

Also there are layered meanings and symbolic overtones, that is quite common in scripture.

Sure there are. In the minds of god-botherers. I see none of that in text such as "On the third day God created X, Y and Z". It's either accurate or it isn't. Science assures us that it is pure fantasy.
dee-em
Posts: 6,481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 12:45:43 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/30/2015 1:53:19 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 2:34:58 PM, Notamoron wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

You're talking about god as an objective thing yet this process is something which doesn't require a god, you have to admit that regardless of the standpoint you take. You proceed to develop your own interpretation and once again treat it likes it's objectively right. Treating it as such is supernatural contradictory to your claim of logic.
The simple insinuation that a god is currently responsible for this process delves into the supernatural which is entirely contradictory to everything you've just said.....You're making claim of a conscious being which cannot be seen in the natural world yet interacts with it.

Atheism says it doesn't require a God not science, there is a difference. We're simply observing what a Spiritual God designed and set in motion.

Assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

We can't see "spirits" (with material eyes anyway) but we can see what God creates in the physical realm obviously.

How then would you distinguish a universe without a creator from one with a creator? What criteria would you use?

In other words even if God exists (which He does) you wouldn't see Him creating, you would only see the results, and that is what we study via science.

And how do the results imply a creator? Do you use the same argument on God? Doesn't God then require a creator?

There is no contradiction about a Spirit creating the physical world.

Except the total lack of evidence for anything labelled "spirit".

God created the material dimension He knows how to put it together and how it operates lol. He is the source of all that we observe.

More assertions without evidence which ...
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 1:04:52 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/30/2015 1:47:38 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 4:17:03 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

Do you ever actually read what you write? You keep telling us your beliefs, religion, spirits, gods, etc. are all part of the supernatural realm, that they cannot "BY THEIR VERY NATURE" be studied by science, and now you're telling us that your God creates planets and physics via "a logical scientific process".

How else would God create our universe nitwit?

I can tell when you're desperate, you act childish and start calling me names.

There is no indication whatsoever as to how God created anything, so it would pure speculation on my part to comment, as it would be pure speculation for you, as well.

how does anyone create anything?? why would God be any different??

No one knows if God would be different in how He creates things compared to humans, again, pure speculation.

God is a conscious Being who can THINK, if you can't think and you can't use logic/reason you can't create!
God is a Spirit, that's already understood....

What's already well understood is the way you contradict yourself all the time, as you did there.

God creates the physical universe, that's already understood so what we have is this....

No, it's not understood by you or anyone else, it is merely your belief based on your imagination and religious indoctrination.

A Spiritual Entity (God) created (put together) the natural/material world, hence we have physics lol, anything else?

That is yet another contradiction based on your beliefs. You simple cannot know that, nor can anyone else.

Seriously, can you be any more hypocritical and contradictory?

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would.

Can you contradict yourself even more? I think you can.

Yes because this is not contradictory, you just have comprehension problems.

Oh, but it is a contradiction.

Can you explain how God creates minus all the attributes it takes to create lol?

Of course not, neither can you.

Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

So, now it's an idea? LOL. Wow, your claims and delusion are all over the map, totally scatter-brained.

Idea-a thought or suggestion as to a possible course of action. The aim or purpose.

In other words, it's just an idea in your head, it isn't real at all.

Simple stuff scatter-brain, anything else?

Since, you have said nothing other than more contradictions and sheer guesswork, we are back at square one.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Skynet
Posts: 674
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 3:48:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

They've been observing this system for less than 2 weeks and they already know these planets are forming just as our system did? Assuming this is a newly forming system, and not something going from its current state to a new non-planetary system, nothing like Uranus will likely develop, and this system will have an obvious Oort Cloud. If the Sol system came about through this same way, where is our Oort Cloud?
One perk to being a dad is you get to watch cartoons again without explaining yourself.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 5:04:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

How exactly does the Bible say God made the Earth?

It is said the Earth was made by falling snow, one layer at a time. That's not that far off from cosmic dust in the freezing deep of space coalescing.

If God made everything why would he need to break some law of physics? Which to be clear, what you are calling the "laws of physics" is actually man-made models, descriptions of the interactions in Nature. I'm unaware of mankind knowing EVERY single prescriptive law of nature, so it is in fact if God "broke" a "law of nature" it would really be he knew it better than we do.

So nice strawman yawn, you should change your name to the affirmative.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 5:08:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
A literal interpretation of Genesis as being actual 6, 24 hour days, is not the norm nor majority of interpretations Since Genesis was int he Torah, or since it was in the bible.

I wish Anti-Theist would stop regurgitating what they saw on some militant atheist twitter post.

https://archive.org...
dee-em
Posts: 6,481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 6:28:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Much as I hate to pollute this site with a link to AiG, this article does give a good overview of Christian acceptance of creationism right up to the last few centuries:

https://answersingenesis.org...

Most of the Church Fathers interpreted Genesis 1 in a plain and straightforward way, as actual history. The six days were 24-hour days. Ephraim (Ephrem) the Syrian (306-373) and Basil of Caesarea (329-379) argued for the literal sense of Scripture against the distortions of allegory. Basil said twenty-four hours fill up the space of one day. Even Ambrose of Milan (330-397), mentor of Augustine, believed each day consisted of twenty-four hours, including both day and night. In addition to this, the Fathers believed that the earth was less than 6,000 years old.

Medieval (AD 600-1517) theologians, until later years, followed Augustine. They viewed creation as instantaneous, and the six days as a literary framework. An example is Anselm of Canterbury (c. 1033-1109).

Bede (c. 673-735) moderated Augustine's view. He believed creation had occurred instantaneously but was formed over six 24-hour days. Others, such as Andrew of St. Victor (c. 1110-1175), rejected Augustine's view and interpreted Genesis 1 literally.

The medieval church continued to believe that creation was sudden, not gradual, and occurred fewer than 6,000 years in the past. As interpreters began returning to a literal reading of Scripture, they began restoring the literal view of the days of creation.


Christians seek to deny their own history.
Notamoron
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 10:12:29 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/1/2015 5:04:50 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

How exactly does the Bible say God made the Earth?

It is said the Earth was made by falling snow, one layer at a time. That's not that far off from cosmic dust in the freezing deep of space coalescing.

If God made everything why would he need to break some law of physics? Which to be clear, what you are calling the "laws of physics" is actually man-made models, descriptions of the interactions in Nature. I'm unaware of mankind knowing EVERY single prescriptive law of nature, so it is in fact if God "broke" a "law of nature" it would really be he knew it better than we do.

So nice strawman yawn, you should change your name to the affirmative.

Lol. On 3 occasions now you've made an attempt at ridiculing me only to be stopped in your path after a single response with an inability to refute what was being said. Ironically once again your response is boiled down to that which you do not understand.
Your idea that this statement was in anyway a strawman fallacy is beyond ridiculous. You cannot make a strawman statement regarding religion as you cannot choose what you believe in when conforming to a specific religion. By doing so you no longer conform to that religion.
If I as a soccer player, pick up the ball and start running down the field from midfield. I am no longer playing soccer. In the same way that a Christian who nitpicks biblical statements is no longer conforming to the Christian belief.

To make it even more ironic, the previous post you responded to made mention of the fact that no matter was is said/done those on the affirmative belief spectrum will simply ignore everything to continue on their own blissfully ignorant path.

To make it even better, you fail to know what physics actually is, which once again the last post made mention to the fact those opposing the idea typically don't understand it. Describing physics as a man-made model.....Physics is DESCRIBED using man-made models. The idea of physics however is the observation of the natural world and conceptual understanding of how it works.

Firstly, I do not propose a "god" needs to be supernatural in nature, I insinuate that the god's depicted in man-made religion are said to be supernatural and therefore, based on our available evidence it is ludicrous to consider them a possibility.
However, if you simply place the term god onto a conscious being who created the planet, it is a theoretical possibility. Based on what we know, it is still heavily unlikely but the concept removes you from the realm of idiocy and into that of logical thought.

You can't nitpick at biblical interpretation to suit an idea which you consider logical and use it as an argument to justify belief. You can't choose what was intended for literal interpretation and what was not. Even if you do choose to do so, it doesn't change the fact there are several contradictions.
Notamoron
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 10:32:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/30/2015 1:53:19 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 2:34:58 PM, Notamoron wrote:
At 11/29/2015 10:27:46 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

Yes where have you been?? we all know how planets form, you have already learned that right lol? Nobody is rejecting how planets form, just because there is a process to form planets that doesn't mean there is no Creator, actually there WOULD be a process if there was a Creator, so surely we would see a logical "scientific" process.
A spiritual God creates physics in this dimension not defies them, physics only exists because God created lol.

God doesn't whip planets into shape in a week, God uses logic, intelligence, process and construction just like any other mind would. Nobody seems to understand Genesis is only a picture (imagery) of what God did, it's called an IDEA not scientific data nor was it written by scientists.

You're talking about god as an objective thing yet this process is something which doesn't require a god, you have to admit that regardless of the standpoint you take. You proceed to develop your own interpretation and once again treat it likes it's objectively right. Treating it as such is supernatural contradictory to your claim of logic.
The simple insinuation that a god is currently responsible for this process delves into the supernatural which is entirely contradictory to everything you've just said.....You're making claim of a conscious being which cannot be seen in the natural world yet interacts with it.

Atheism says it doesn't require a God not science, there is a difference. We're simply observing what a Spiritual God designed and set in motion. We can't see "spirits" (with material eyes anyway) but we can see what God creates in the physical realm obviously. In other words even if God exists (which He does) you wouldn't see Him creating, you would only see the results, and that is what we study via science.

There is no contradiction about a Spirit creating the physical world. God created the material dimension He knows how to put it together and how it operates lol. He is the source of all that we observe.

What am I meant to say to this? You just called something true without supplying any evidence or reasoning whatsoever. Scientific observation contradicts biblical teachings, along with the fact biblical teachings contradict themselves.
What you've said has no more bearing than a schizophrenic mental patient claiming truth to the voices in their head.

If I told you I could fly, you would be an idiot for believing me. Even in the hypothetical situation where I was capable of flying, you are still an idiot for believing me as the evidence provided at the time, along with your knowledge regarding all other humans on the planet contradict this proposition. The same concept applies to the spiritual concept of god. If he turned out to be real, I would be wrong for the right reasons, you would be right for the wrong reasons. At least that way after the gloating has passed, you have all eternity to realize how pitiful it was to concede to something without good reason.

Your calling god real like it's fact and using transparency to avoid turning the matter into an intellectual discussion. No.

You believe in an improbable god. Your reasoning is illogical. If you continue to do so, so be it, and I respect your choice to do so. You may turn out to be correct you may not. As previously mentioned, the outcome is irrelevant to the implications of your mind working in such away.
Notamoron
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 10:48:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/1/2015 5:08:42 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
A literal interpretation of Genesis as being actual 6, 24 hour days, is not the norm nor majority of interpretations Since Genesis was int he Torah, or since it was in the bible.

I wish Anti-Theist would stop regurgitating what they saw on some militant atheist twitter post.

https://archive.org...

I wasn't under the impression that the interpretation of genesis was taken literally by many. Some still do, and for those who don't this concept can be expanded to discuss the fact that biblical teaching imply the earth was existent prior gravitational force, light etc Do you then take it one step further and say the teachings were not only not literal, but now that I've mentioned another flaw i'm sure the creation process is also to be interpreted in an arrangement different to biblical teachings?
If I'm to create a metaphor depicting human growth I don't start as a middle aged man and morph into a pre-pubescent child right before I jump to elderly life and finish it all off as a newborn.

Like my above post mentioned. You just nitpick.
dee-em
Posts: 6,481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 12:42:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Traditional Catholic Doctrine on Creation

Both the Council of Trent and Vatican Council I taught that no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture "contrary to the unanimous agreement of the Fathers."1 In the words of Fr. Victor Warkulwiz:

The Fathers and Doctors of the Church unanimously agreed that Genesis 1-11 is an inerrant literal historical account of the beginning of the world and the human species as related by the prophet Moses under divine inspiration. This does not mean that they agreed on every point in its interpretation, but their differences were accidental and not essential. Pope Leo XIII, following St. Augustine, affirmed the Catholic rule for interpreting Sacred Scripture, "not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires."

For the first five centuries of the Church, all of the Fathers believed and proclaimed:

. that less than 6,000 years had passed from the creation of the world to the birth of Jesus.

. that the creation of the cosmos took place in six 24 hour days or in an instant of time

. that God created the different kinds of living things instantly and immediately

. that Adam was created from the dust of the earth and Eve from his side

. that God ceased to create new kinds of creatures after the creation of Adam

. that the Original Sin of Adam shattered the perfect harmony of the first-created world and brought human death, deformity, and disease into the world.


http://kolbecenter.org...
bulproof
Posts: 25,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 1:01:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/30/2015 2:19:02 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

wow you seem keen to trust what someone else has told you to be true and remember that being "science" that can all change in no time at all...

good to see your level of faith though even if it is something fallible...
I love how the faithful use the word faith as a form of ridicule for others.
Not terribly bright are they.
But funny.
graceofgod
Posts: 5,097
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 2:29:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/1/2015 1:01:34 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 11/30/2015 2:19:02 PM, graceofgod wrote:
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

wow you seem keen to trust what someone else has told you to be true and remember that being "science" that can all change in no time at all...

good to see your level of faith though even if it is something fallible...
I love how the faithful use the word faith as a form of ridicule for others.
Not terribly bright are they.
But funny.

It's not a form of ridicule more a comparison but I can understand how you missed it...
Maccabee
Posts: 1,247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/1/2015 5:26:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/29/2015 3:29:11 AM, Notamoron wrote:
Less than 2 weeks ago science has witnessed the forming of planets for the first time, which you guessed it... entirely line up with theories proposed by science and contradict that proposed by religion. Well slap my asss and call me sally. Surely a logical scientific process couldn't create a planet. Where's the spiritual god defying the laws of physics and gravity whipping the planet into shape over the space of a week?

http://www.abc.net.au...

So they saw a spot in the dust getting clearer and saw a planet. Couldn't the planet have always been there (sorry about the grammar) and the dust cleared enought for us to see it? Besides, they didnt actually saw the planet forming, they saw a spot in the dust which they haven't seen before.
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born