6 Days of Creation

Originally posted by sonhouse
Tell me, how long would it have taken, say, for a brontosaurus in what we now call South America, to swim across the Atlantic ocean to get to the arc and what would this giant vegetarian have eaten along the way? As a vegetarian there would not have been many leaves to eat in the middle of the ocean. How many months would it have taken for that animal to cr ...[text shortened]... thousands of miles more on land to get to the arc?

I see Wolfgang and I had the same problem.

Not to mention koalas 🙄

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I can't remember if it was RJHinds or KellyJay i was having a conversation with about this. I asked whoever it was -

So if there were a couple of T-Rex's on this boat, how come they didn't go around eating all the other animals?

Answer -

They were vegetarian.

Pure brilliance.

OMG!!

This is becoming very ridiculous, very quickly.

I still dont see why christians cant just admit that some of the bible is in error and that some of it should be taken as analogy.
To persist in these totally counterintuitive, nonsensical explanations to defend their bible only serves to further undermine whatever truth was left in the bible.

It seems to me that those who dont agree with them,(like you and I, for example), should suspend our intellects, our reasoning skills and our common sense so that we may be benifitted from the "saving grace" of the bible.

(I've always equated the idea of "God" with "truth" , " integrity" ,"intelligence" and other such concepts , rather, it seems that we should have faith that we dont really understand what's really going on and that despite a mountain of evidence suggesting the contrary, we should accept the word of the bible and make the evidence fit the (holy) bible because to not do so wold be going against the word of the bible, thus disqualifying us from the benefits offered to those that submit totally to the "truth" contained in that book...)

"They were vegetarians" . Yeah? (I realize that you are NOT the one saying this)
What about the mountains of food that would be needed to sustain these so-called vegetarians? Was there enough space for all the animals food?

This is so utterly ridiculous that it defies all logic-it is amazing what lengths these crazies will go to to defend their holy book.
At least my "crazy" idea of (spiritual) evolution tries to allign itself with the currently accepted , scientific notions of life and spirituality (if there is such a thing)

Originally posted by sumydid
Kind sir, I don't believe that my construction is flawed; in fact the staunch evolutionist may have a similar field day with the convenience built into your argument, i.e. that days and nights are just vague markers of time.

It may seem absurd or fundy-esque of me to follow this account in Genesis to the letter, but I see it as being pretty explicit in re ...[text shortened]... nce to suggest we should treat the creation account as a fanciful poem, allegory, or whatever.

Agree, sumy, with the lone exception of "just vague markers of time". "Convenient" or not,

they were quite to the contrary distinct delineations of sequential categories of creation.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Agree, sumy, with the lone exception of "just vague markers of time". "Convenient" or not,

they were quite to the contrary distinct delineations of sequential categories of creation.

How can you possibly know that? (rhetorical, you can't)

Even assuming that the stories in the bible were told to people by god they were still
listened to and then written down by mear men.
Men who thought the world was flat, covered by a crystal dome, and held up by 4 pillars.
These men wrote the bible, and whether divinely inspired or not, (and it's blatantly obvious
they were not) it's impossible to tell apart what elements of the story are accurate and which
are embellishments or misunderstandings of ancient people.
Add to that the fact that the flowery imprecise poetic language of the bible means it's possible
to interpret the bible and genesis many different ways, and the fact that that language has
translated from another (dead) language....

And you must reach the inescapable conclusion that it is not possible to know for certain how
accurate the bible is and whether or not it is meant to be taken literally or allegorically.

Couple this with the fact that bits of the bible (genesis) are provably demonstrably false,
and you can't possibly honestly claim that you KNOW what the writers of the bible intended.
You can't claim to KNOW what they mean, you can believe they mean something, but you by
definition can't know it.

This is aptly demonstrated by the myriad of differing present religions who disagree on what stories
to include and what they mean and how they should be read, let alone the fact that many of those
religions have changed their views over time, and that not everyone in those religions all agree with
each other.
Many even admit the bible has to be interpreted, by people, who are fallible, thus meaning you can't
KNOW what any given passage means. You can never be that certain.

Likewise, you can't KNOW what god wants or thinks, because your holy book is as demonstrated human
and fallible, but so are you, and so even if you do have something you think is divine inspiration you
can't possibly claim to understand or know the mind of a being you claim to be the ultimate being,
no being can be smarter or more powerful, no being can be more complex, no being can be less
comprehensible.

You can't know what god thinks or wants. You can have faith, you can have belief, you can't know.

Originally posted by googlefudge
How can you possibly know that? (rhetorical, you can't)

Even assuming that the stories in the bible were told to people by god they were still
listened to and then written down by mear men.
Men who thought the world was flat, covered by a crystal dome, and held up by 4 pillars.
These men wrote the bible, and whether divinely inspired or not, (and ...[text shortened]... w what god thinks or wants. You can have faith, you can have belief, you can't know.

You ASSUME many things here. You know to ASSUME makes an ASS out of
U am ME.

Originally posted by googlefudge
How can you possibly know that? (rhetorical, you can't)

Even assuming that the stories in the bible were told to people by god they were still
listened to and then written down by mear men.
Men who thought the world was flat, covered by a crystal dome, and held up by 4 pillars.
These men wrote the bible, and whether divinely inspired or not, (and w what god thinks or wants. You can have faith, you can have belief, you can't know.

I know with absolute confidence, GF, because I know Him in whom I have believed.

gb

Originally posted by RJHinds
You ASSUME many things here. You know to ASSUME makes an ASS out of
U am ME.

It makes an ass out of you. I said even assuming god spoke to these people.

I DON'T assume that, as implied by me saying, "even assuming".

My point being even if you do assume gods existence and that he inspired the bible,
which is indeed unjustified and patently wrong.
You still face all the problems I mentioned.

Read it again with your brain turned on... if you still remember where the switch is.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
I know with absolute confidence, GF, because I know Him in whom I have believed.

gb

You can't by definition know, you can only believe because your beliefs require faith which precluded knowledge.

If you had knowledge you wouldn't have faith, they are mutually exclusive.

Originally posted by googlefudge
How can you possibly know that? (rhetorical, you can't)

Even assuming that the stories in the bible were told to people by god they were still
listened to and then written down by mear men.
Men who thought the world was flat, covered by a crystal dome, and held up by 4 pillars.
These men wrote the bible, and whether divinely inspired or not, (and ...[text shortened]... w what god thinks or wants. You can have faith, you can have belief, you can't know.

You can know. Just ask Him.

Oh, wait. You have to be pure in heart to expect an answer. Sorry.

I guess you'll never know, then. Just don't project your failure on the rest of us.

Originally posted by googlefudge
If you had knowledge you wouldn't have faith, they are mutually exclusive.

This statement is sooo false, it's ridiculous. According to you, you should have all knowledge, since you have no faith. Anyone can see it is obviously false. Except maybe you. The one with all the knowledge.

Originally posted by Suzianne
This statement is sooo false, it's ridiculous. According to you, you should have all knowledge, since you have no faith. Anyone can see it is obviously false. Except maybe you. The one with all the knowledge.

No, that's not what I said at all, you can't even twist my words to mean anything like that.


If you know something exists, (ie it can be demonstrated, you have lots of evidence, others
can confirm this ect ect) then you can't have 'faith' that it exists because you know it exists.

Faith is defined as believing in something without proof, you have said yourself that the whole
point of your religion is that you have faith not proof.

If you have knowledge you have knowledge not faith.

If you have faith, you don't have knowledge.

This doesn't preclude having neither faith nor knowledge.

And having knowledge and not faith about one thing does not mean you have knowledge of
everything or faith in nothing.


I would, have, and will, never claim to have all knowledge, apart from anything else it's impossible.

And not having proof of something and believing it on faith doesn't make that belief true or false.
Just unsubstantiated.

I do however think it wrong and impractical to believe things on blind faith.

Originally posted by Suzianne
You can know. Just ask Him.

Oh, wait. You have to be pure in heart to expect an answer. Sorry.

I guess you'll never know, then. Just don't project your failure on the rest of us.

Knowledge requires the ability to be able to test that information and to demonstrate it to others.

You can't do this, thus you have faith, not knowledge.

Originally posted by googlefudge

You can't by definition know, you can only believe because your beliefs require faith which precluded knowledge.

If you had knowledge you wouldn't have faith, they are mutually exclusive.

All normal human beings are equipped with three, and only three, means of perception and acquiring knowledge: 1) Empiricism (taste it, touch it, observe and measure it in the lab); 2) Rationalism (consider it academically, ponder it and think it through); 3) Faith Perception (consider information from a reliable source or person whose authority you accept). Children learn stove tops are hot. Serious students reason their way from unknown to known using inductive and deductive methods to gain insights of mechanics and constructs, premises and conclusions in play. Children of all ages are given information they're circumstantially unable to prove but accept as factual and true (as we all have in geoghraphy classes in grade school when told of faraway countries and exotic places we'll likely never visit but accept as real and existing at specific coordinates on or off the face of the globe we all share.

gb

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
All normal human beings are equipped with three, and only three, means of perception and acquiring knowledge: [b]1) Empiricism (taste it, touch it, observe and measure it in the lab); 2) Rationalism (consider it academically, ponder it and think it through); 3) Faith Perception (consider information from a reliable source or person who ...[text shortened]... eal and existing at specific coordinates on or off the face of the globe we all share.

gb[/b]

You have said this before and it was wrong then and is wrong now.

Faith perception is not a way of gaining knowledge.

Originally posted by googlefudge

You have said this before and it was wrong then and is wrong now.

Faith perception is not a way of gaining knowledge.

All human beings place their faith (trust and confidence) in someone or something from day one cradled in the cleft of a mother's arm, each following day and eventually immobile and dependent upon a death bed. All human beings die from the same cause: shortness of breath. All human beings will reside at one of two addresses for all eternity: eternal happininess in Heaven with God or eternal punishment alone in the Lake of Fire separated from Him for all eternity. All human beings have one brief window to get it right... to apprehend absolute truth which was here long before we arrived and will still be here long after we're gone. All human beings must choose what or whom to place their trust and confidence in. All human beings must face squarely into the same bottom line: that our temporal choices are highly personal and have far reaching ramifications for our immortal souls. Choice is up to you and your family members and friends, google fudge, as it is also up to me and mine. Kind reagards, Bob

.