PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Evidence for creationism
       Reloaded. Starring, truthworks.

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

From the thread An Issue w/ Macro-Evolution:
truthworks
I did look at the evidence you provided. I’m still willing to look at more. (...) Along the same lines, are you willing to look at evidence for creationism?
We're all about that.

Bring it on.



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 12:42 AM on December 13, 2009 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

We're all about that.  Bring it on.

Don't we ask for this evidence every time a new creationist pops up here?  After a couple of years, we're still waiting...
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 12:51 AM on December 13, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Indeed. I guess we're starting to look kinda needy and desperate. Haha!

We don't get that offer very often.

Here i am, calling his bluff, even though the offering could be virtual. It was actually just a question...

In any case, my bet is that he doesn't even know what 'evidence for' means.

He's an Old Earth Creationist, which statistically means he's a bit smarter than a YEC (which isn't rare). That doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about.



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 01:02 AM on December 13, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

truthworks, in An Issue with Macro-Evolution, wrote:
wisp,
I think we have reached a point that it serves no purpose to continue our discussions. I don't feel that you are open to anything I say. I say this because you belittle many of the things I write and attack me persoanlly. Therefore, I am not willing to discuss these issues with you any further.
Does that mean that... OMG... You won't present your relevant and compelling evidence for Creation? Only because i started this thread??

Should someone else start it?

Damn... My rudeness made me lost this one-in-a-lifetime chance to finally see some evidence for creation...



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 10:49 AM on December 13, 2009 | IP
derwood

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

It is the classic creationist escape clause - timbrx, lester, and gluteus tried it on me - when they know they've backed themselves into a corner scientifically/intellectually, out come the accusations of rudeness, elitism, condescension, etc. as a means of justifying the fact that they are going to run away either form the subject at hand, or from you personally.

It is very predictable and very funny to watch it pan out.




-------
Lester:

"I said I have a doctorate and a university background in anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, physics, chemistry, pathology etc. ..."
 


Posts: 1646 | Posted: 12:15 PM on December 13, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yeah... They cannot note their own rudeness, and pride, and arrogance, and aggression.

This new user introduced himself saying
Macro-evolution is the real issue here. This dogma asserts that all living things evolved from a single-celled organism that mystically appeared billions of years ago.


He's another Dunning-Kruggerite, as you would put it.

It's crystal clear.

He says things like:
truthworks
orion
So looking at the other option, that life arose from non-life, makes more sense to me.
I may make more sense to you personally but I postulate that it’s unscientific.
This came from a guy who doesn't know how Science works, believes that it should get evidence without research, that it deals with proof, that it doesn't deal with speculation, doesn't know what a theory is, doesn't know what evidence is, can't tell fact from truth, can't tell evidence from proof, and gleefully declares that we observe that the light we see from the stars looks the same no matter the distance.

Hubble would be turning in his grave.

They don't question themselves. They don't think that the fact that they 'happen' to have faith in the Bible interferes with their already poor ability to think scientifically.

To me it's ok not to know. Pretending to know is what strikes me as arrogant.

I honestly believe that we're humbler than they are, even if we're more aggressive or less patient than some.

I don't know how orion does it... The man is a saint! And a smart one too!



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 2:37 PM on December 13, 2009 | IP
truthworks

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

wisp,
I didn't realize there was another discussion going on... since I'm new around here, at least I have an excuse right? Hahaha We've already dealt with a lot of the things you wrote in this thread in the other one. On most of the points I was wrong. (Oh, and sorry for saying I didn't want to discuss anymore, I was just put off by what I perceived as rudeness).

So the evidence that I was going to share about creationism deals with prophecy. But now I realize that this is off topic. The ToE does not deal with abiogenesis and since I accept that evolution is a fact, what I'm going to talk about does not threaten or condemn it.

Basically, there are hundreds of prophecies found in the Bible. People have carbon-dated different scrolls (such as those found in Qumran) that have prophecies that were fulfilled hundreds (or thousands) of years later.

One example would be the desolation of Babylon predicted in Isaiah. Portions of manuscripts that contain the prophecy have been carbon-dated to 200 B.C. Babylon wasn't depopulated until about 800 A.D. The prophecy specifically said that Babylon would "never be inhabited again" once it was desolate. (Isaiah 13:20) It was to be a perpetual desolation so it's a prophecy that we can see being fulfilled today.

http://drongos.com/images/i_babylon.jpg

Another example comes from Revelation 13:16-17 which talks about the mark of the beast:
"The second beast forces all people-important and unimportant people, rich and poor people, free people and slaves-to be branded on their right hands or on their foreheads. It does this so that no one may buy or sell unless he has the brand, which is the beast's name or the number of its name."

So the prophecy says that people receive the mark in their hand or their forehead and cannot buy or sell without it.

Compare this prophecy with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYrHpjULWj0&feature=related

Anyway, it doesn't really matter if we "believe" it or not. The fact is that these prophecies exist, they've been carbon-dated on ancient scrolls and we can see evidence of their fulfillment. From what I can see (which may be mistaken) this is evidence for the exitence of a creator.
 


Posts: 30 | Posted: 10:23 AM on December 20, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

During what 40 years was Egypt uninhabited?

Eze 29:10      Behold, therefore I [am] against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste [and] desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia.
Eze 29:11  No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years.
Eze 29:12  And I will make the land of Egypt desolate in the midst of the countries [that are] desolate, and her cities among the cities [that are] laid waste shall be desolate forty years: and I will scatter the Egyptians among the nations, and will disperse them through the countries.
Eze 29:13 Yet thus saith the Lord GOD; At the end of forty years will I gather the Egyptians from the people whither they were scattered:
Eze 29:14  And I will bring again the captivity of Egypt, and will cause them to return [into] the land of Pathros, into the land of their habitation; and they shall be there a base kingdom.
Eze 29:15  It shall be the basest of the kingdoms; neither shall it exalt itself any more above the nations: for I will diminish them, that they shall no more rule over the nations.


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 2:21 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
truthworks

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Apoapis,

During what 40 years was Egypt uninhabited?


Good point. I think these are the only options to answer your question:

1) This is a failed prophecy.

2) Special pleading - maybe it really did happen but the Egyptians covered it up. From my limited knowledge of ancient Egypt, I think they frequently tried to downplay their military defeats. If Eygpt really was uninhabited and then returned, I could see them trying to “erase” evidence that it happened at all (to protect the reputation of their gods).

3) Since no timeframe was given for the prophecy, it could be yet future. The prophecy about the destruction of Babylon that was already fulfilled didn’t happen for 1,000+ years after the prophecy was written down. This also applies to the prophecies about the desolation of Tyre, Assyria, Edom, etc.

I admit that either three are possible. But given the thousands of prophecies that have come to pass as they were predicted, I lean towards the last option.
 


Posts: 30 | Posted: 4:40 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But Nebuchanezzer is long dead and he never conquered Egypt.

Eze 29:19   Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will give the land of Egypt unto Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon; and he shall take her multitude, and take her spoil, and take her prey; and it shall be the wages for his army.
Eze 29:20  I have given him the land of Egypt [for] his labour wherewith he served against it, because they wrought for me, saith the Lord GOD.


-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 5:47 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
Fencer27

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from truthworks at 4:40 PM on December 20, 2009 :
I admit that either three are possible. But given the thousands of prophecies that have come to pass as they were predicted, I lean towards the last option.


Given enough time, almost anything "predicted" will come to pass.

While I haven't studied prophecies (I never really cared about them, always thought they were too easy to fake and or skew them), I had heard that most prophecies in the Bible were not meant to be long term. Instead, they were used to show that this person is a prophet of God so you should listen to him.


-------
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus (Matthew 7:12)
 


Posts: 551 | Posted: 5:52 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from truthworks at 4:40 PM on December 20, 2009 :
I admit that either three are possible. But given the thousands of prophecies that have come to pass as they were predicted, I lean towards the last option.


Of course you do, you have no other options if this is your only support of creationism.



-------
Pogge:” This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.”
Wikipedia:” For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).”
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 5:55 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

truthworks
wisp,
I didn't realize there was another discussion going on... since I'm new around here, at least I have an excuse right? Hahaha
Haha, yes, you do... Ok.
(Oh, and sorry for saying I didn't want to discuss anymore, I was just put off by what I perceived as rudeness).
Well, you perceived right. I thought i perceived the same from you ("mystically", "dogma") and that you would never correct yourself. Happily i was mistaken.
So the evidence that I was going to share about creationism deals with prophecy.
How is that evidence FOR the biblical story about creation?
But now I realize that this is off topic.
No, it's on topic. Evidence for creation is very well on topic.
The ToE does not deal with abiogenesis and since I accept that evolution is a fact, what I'm going to talk about does not threaten or condemn it.
A piece of evidence FOR biblical creationism counts as a slanted attack on Evolution too...

Anyway, even though you accept Evolution as a fact, that doesn't mean you believe the whole picture, right? That we evolved from primates that evolved from reptiles that evolved from fish, right?

In any case, your prophecies don't count as evidence for creationism, because there are other plausible explanations.

For instance, when you predict that a nation will fall, well... No brainer. Every nation falls. And even if they didn't, you can safely predict it anyway, if you don't add a deadline.

But, in any case, let's say i bought it. Let's say that those prophecies are really that, and are really accurate.

So what?

Can the Devil predict the future? Then perhaps the Devil wrote the Bible, and it was written to confound people.

I don't believe in psychics, but they are far more likely than Yahweh.

Even the Bible acknowledges that there are psychics (not that i buy it anyway).

It says:
Deut. 13:1-3
If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, `Let us go after other gods'--which you have not known--`and let us serve them,' you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for Yahweh your God is testing you to know whether you love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
The Bible itself tells you not to be guided by that.

So, best explanation: The prophecies are crap and deluded people are easily impressed by vague generalities or remote possibilities, and forget easily about the blunders.

So, an explanation just as likely as yours: They were inspired by the Devil (or some other capricious demon who appeared AFTER everything was already in place and wanted to take credit).

Another explanation (unlikely, but more likely than yours): They were psychics with no divine inspiration, like those from Deut 13.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter if we "believe" it or not.
Evidence is what matters. You presented none.
The fact is that these prophecies exist, they've been carbon-dated on ancient scrolls and we can see evidence of their fulfillment.
Economists make better predictions.

Heck, even Nostradamus did.

There are some seriously crappy prophecies. Like in Luke 24:46. Speaking to his disciples on the night of his alleged resurrection, he said,

"Thus it is written and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day."

That the resurrection of Christ on the third day was prophesied in the scriptures was claimed also by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4:
"For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures."

In two different places, then, New Testament writers claimed that the resurrection of the Messiah on the third day had been predicted in the scriptures. Try as they may, however, nobody has been able to produce an Old Testament passage that made this alleged third-day prediction. It simply doesn't exist.

So we have a sharpshooter's fallacy. After the event (that i don't buy for one second anyway) you invent a previous prophecy.

You can shoot a wall and paint a target around those places where you hit.

That should be enough to putt you off this nonsense.

But there are more:
Matthew 27:9-10
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price; and they gave them for the potter's field as the Lord appointed me
Except that Jeremiah never made that prophecy.

Seriously, he didn't.

Matthew did this quite often, apparently. Like that "prophecy" that said that the Christ would be called "Nazarene".

Find me that prophecy. I dare you. The word "Nazarene" or "Nazareth" is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament.

From what I can see (which may be mistaken) this is evidence for the exitence of a creator.
I think Deuteronomy 13 shows you that it's not.

There's a prophecy that Jesus did fulfill: He entered the temple riding an ass.

It was a deliberate provocation. Jesus knew that prophecy. It was a cool "In your face!". He was a courageous fellow.

Oh, i found some cool failed prophecies:

From here:


Genesis 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.

Here God tells Isaac that his descendents (Hebrews) will be as numerous as the stars.  Considering the number of stars there are in the universe, that would have to be on the order of 1020 Jewish people.

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Christians say that this verse is a prophecy of Jesus' birth to a virgin.  There are a couple problems with this prophecy...First, virgin in this verse is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word "almah", which actually means "young woman".  A young woman is not necessarily a virgin.  "Bethulah" would have been the correct word to use if the author meant virgin.  Second, nowhere in the New Testament is Jesus referred to as Immanuel.

Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

Damascus is still inhabited today with over a million people, and hardly a ruinous heap.

Isaiah 19:4-5 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts. And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up.

The river mentioned here is the Nile.  The Nile is still one of Egypt's greatest natural resource.

Isaiah 19:18 In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the LORD of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction.

The Canaanite language has never been spoken in Egypt, and is now an extinct.

Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

There are uncircumcised people living in Jerusalem even today.

Ezekiel 29:10-11 Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia.  No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years.

Never in its long history has Egypt ever been uninhabited for forty years.

Amos 9:15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.

Many times, Jews have been pulled up out of their land.  The ownership of their land is still being fought for.

Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

Nineveh was never overthrown.  Why?  Because God changed his mind in verse 3:10, despite what Malachi 3:6, Numbers 23:19 and Ezekiel 24:14 says about God never changing his mind.

Jonah 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Zechariah 11:12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.

Christians say that this prophecy is was fulfilled when Judas received 30 pieces of silver for betraying Jesus.  Matthew 27:9 recites this verse, but incorrectly credits Jeremiah with the prophecy.

Matthew 1:22-23 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Again, Jesus is never referred to as Emmanuel (Immanuel).

Matthew 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

Nowhere in the Old Testament is such a prophecy found, so how could such a one be fulfilled?

Matthew 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

There is no passage in the Old Testament that can be attributed to what Jesus is saying here.

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Jesus states that all the signs marking the end of the world in Matthew 24 would be fulfilled before his generation ended.  That generation ended 2000 years ago, and the world has not come to an end, neither has all those signs been fulfilled.

Matthew 27:9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value.

This prophecy was never spoken by Jeremiah.

Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Jesus tells the high priest that he would see his second coming.  The high priest is long dead, and Jesus hasn't returned yet.

Throughout the New Testament, the end of the world is prophesied as being very near, at hand, to be witnessed by those living at the time.  Paul often told the people he preached to that they would be witnesses to Jesus' second coming.  They are all long gone.


In any case i want to remind you that, even if every prophecy was accurate (they're not) that doesn't mean they were divinely inspired. Not necessarily. Psychics, as unlikely as they might be, are far more plausible than Yahweh.

(Edited by wisp 12/20/2009 at 10:15 PM).


-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 10:03 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

truthworks
Apoapis
During what 40 years was Egypt uninhabited?
(...) 3) Since no timeframe was given for the prophecy, it could be yet future.
(...)I admit that either three are possible. But given the thousands of prophecies that have come to pass as they were predicted, I lean towards the last option.
Nice! So in any case we're safe for AT LEAST 40 more years!

Woohoo!!

I'll tell that to anyone who tells me that the end is near.
I'll tell them "When Egypt gets inhabited, we can talk."



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 10:10 PM on December 20, 2009 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.