I don't like to waste my time either. But, there might be a few people that are not afraid to examine their presumptions about the Bible, and the physical creation.
What of the dinosaurs?
- Thread starter Blain
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I don't like to waste my time either. But, there might be a few people that are not afraid to examine their presumptions about the Bible, and the physical creation.
Personally, I value Dr. Hurd's contributions, and I am a Christian. I perceive his objective as educating people, for the most part.
This is Bible Discussion Forum. The title of this thread is "What of the dinosaurs?"
Has Dr. Hurd provided much credible information regarding dinosaurs, dating methods for determining the age of fossils, and related matters?
Yes.
And what do we see from Young Earth Creationists on this thread?
A regurgitation of Dr. Dino (Kent Hovind) and son videos and information from YEC websites like ICR, AiG, and CMI that is constantly refuted successfully, with little or no response from the YEC who brought it up in the first place.
What is it that you YECs want?
It appears to me that what the YECs want in this forum is affirmation, not information. When information is presented to YECs, there is a whole lot of Attention Deficit Disorder going on, especially today.
And then you have the YECs who call anybody who does not agree with them a troll. That's about as lame as a three-legged dog.
Last edited:
And then you have the Young Earth Creationists who portray those who do not agree with them as heretics.
Pathetic.
Where you see seeds of deception, I see seeds of wisdom; I see truth.https://www.google.ca/search?client...HNeBygS-1YCAAQ&ved=0CBsQBSgA&biw=1344&bih=681
This was also known as the "Omphalos Question" Did Adam have a belly button?
The mammal navel is where the fetus attached to the mother's uterus via the placenta and umbilical cord. So, if Adam was created de novo, and Eve was created by fiat by some genetic trick with a male rib, did they have belly buttons?
Having no mother, there would be no reason at all for a human navel.
Then, consider the massive fraud that the Young Earth Creationist demands from God. There is not the least reason for there to be mountains obviously pushed up over millions of years as continental tectonic plates squeeze together. There was no need that they trapped oceanic sediments between them, and created mountains filled with fossils. This is the opposite of what the Bible says about the trust worthiness of God, and the Creation.
Is is not my problem to solve because I do not read the Bible as an ordinary book. I do not read the Bible as a science text.
Anne Harrington, in her book, "Reenchanted Science" discussed at some length how the discoveries of materialistic science in the late 1870s through the 1920 shocked the ordinary person. It seemed to cut them off from any cosmic importance.
A century later it is still a problem for some.
Last edited:
Again, why should I address this if you never addressed my arguments?
Where you there? No.
I find it fascinating how I stated my criticisms of young earth "science", and instead of rebutting my claims you try to challenge dating methods. I have no problem discussing dating methods with you, but I'm not going to let you dodge all my questions and avoid my responses.
When you address the issues I mentioned, I'll address your argument. Otherwise, there's no reason for me to oblige you in debate.
I respect your views, everyone currently has free will.
If it is simply a matter science, technology, free thinking, propelling man ahead, etc etc then why not show poeple the positives and naturally have them seek, and why is there no talk of the people that hi-jack science for personal or dark purpose? I expose those within my filed that misuse it...
If it is something deeper, then my personal issue is with falsehood and deception, if what one has is truly good for humanity and the earth they would never have to resort to underhanded tactics... I have no problem with people choosing their way even if it is against what I believe, but people should be able to have the facts, not twisted "facts" and hidden truths.
Tell me this, within "the brotherhood" why is it ok to lie and decieve those below you... and does not a bombardment of lies create a mind that will accept nearly anything?
Teachings like "the ends justify the means"
That is the most non-sense teaching I have ever heard, "its ok for me to do evil because I get what I want" but I know "the ends justify the means" sounds so intellectual...
Bottom line, if one can not or is not willing to face these blatant falsehoods and justification of evil, how can I take said person seriously.
Are you aware that there are BIOLOGICAL ISSUES with evolution? Please explain how an egg laying animal that has a uterus that produces an outer calcium carbonate shell that the young are developed in OUTSIDE OF THE BODY to an animal that has a uterus that produces a placenta that supplies nourishment to the young inside the body. How do you get from an animal that lays eggs and abandons the nest before the young are hatched that are able to be on their own ,to an animal that stays with the young but does not feed them but are somewhat able to be on their own,to an animal that is helpless that needs to be fed by the parents,to an animals that produces it own milk to feed the young. Can you from biology show HOW ANY OF THAT IS EVEN POSSIBLE? I would love to hear a logical explanation from anyone that believes evolution to be true HOW any of that is EVEN POSSIBLE.
conspiracies do not exist
CDC - Concerns - Cancer, Simian Virus 40 (SV40), and Polio Vaccine Fact Sheet - Vaccine Safety
Vaccine ‘pioneer’ admits adding cancer-causing virus to Vaccine | Planet Infowars
CDC Admits Polio Vaccine Tainted with Cancer Causing Virus
Merck vaccine developer admits vaccines routinely contain hidden cancer viruses derived from diseased monkeys - NaturalNews.com
and neither do $1 bills
satan is not real, but satan says you must give him your soul forever...but dont worry hes not real and this is just a hologram...
Romans 1:20, "For since the creation of the world, the invisible things of Him are clearly seen--His eternal, power and holiness- -being understood by the things that are written; so that they are without excuse."
If one does NOT address the fundamental flaw of the experiments the rest MEANS NOTHING. All that so called research means nothing unless the flaw is addressed. The flaw MUST BE ADDRESSED FIRST before the tests can be verified as being valid.
Explain to me how you could fit so many species of animals onto the ark and explain how species can evolve so quickly after getting off the ark. Also explain how freshwater and salt water plant life and fish could survive.
If we play your game, we'll end up going back and fourth asking each other questions without ever answering anything. This is why you need to address at least some of my points before shooting debunked arguments like a machine gun (then ignoring responses that explain your questions).
The question of whether Adam and Eve had a belly is a POINTLESS question.
The problem with pointing to the mountains being pushed up over "millions of years" leaves out the flood. No one can prove or disprove that the continents DID NOT move faster during and right after the flood. The same effect can be seen whether they moved very slowing or very rapidly.
We already know that you disagree with Genesis....but you agreed to posit specific scripture, and then detail as to why you disagree with it.
This should not be that hard....but it is....for you.
So...let's start at Gen1.1....which states that the Universe had a beginning.
Thus, since you claim to disagree that the Universe had a beginning, show us your evidence that claims that it is eternal.
Sounds like someone is trying to avoid their Smithsonian blunder...
You were open to talking about the Smithonian article you linked, but as soon as I asked you to find a particular segment that supposedly supported your claim, you started to act as if I now suddenly owe you explanations. I do owe you explanations, but I know that as soon as we get into a huge debate about what I have to say, we'll never get to the Smithsonian quote you claim exists.
We don't have to prove something didn't happen. It's up to you to prove something did happen. And how would flood waters make a mountain rise any faster anyway? Can you use science to back your claim?
Its simple rules of engagement.
First in...first out.
Now...show us why you reject that the Universe had a beginning.
Or....admit that you cant...
Noah DID NOT have to take all species aboard the ark. Even evolutionists believe that all dogs came from wolves. All cats had a common ancestor. Etc etc etc. Noah only had to take a common ancestor not every species. It can take as little as four generations to produce a new species.
You do understand that even in the oceans now salinity is NOT equal across the globe? Also at the time of the flood the oceans were not as saline as they are now due to erosion. They would be both pockets of higher salinity and lower salinity. Those that need a higher would be in those pockets and those that need a lower salinity would be in those pockets.
I never made that claim. I said I disagree with all of Genesis 1. I didn't elaborate and for good reason.
I feel our debate is over since you're trying to change the subject.
So an incredibly small number of species on the ark evolved into over hundreds of millions of species within a short 6,000 years?
This doesn't do anything to support your claim that mountains rose during the great flood.