Creationist Museum gets big Tax Break

#61
#61
orangeslice13 said:
Beyond comprehension. I believe I've already stated billions and billions.
Click to expand...

so if I turn my head sideways, stand on one leg, and stick my right index finger in my left ear while reading Genesis I'll catch on to the fact that the bible supports "a very old earth"?

I'm no biblical scholar, but if what you say is true, then many Evangelicals have been doing it wrong.
 
#62
#62
MG1968 said:
so if I turn my head sideways, stand on one leg, and stick my right index finger in my left ear while reading Genesis I'll catch on to the fact that the bible supports "a very old earth"?

I'm no biblical scholar, but if what you say is true, then many Evangelicals have been doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm never sure if you're serious but you appear to be this time. If so go read David Smoke's "A. Biblical case for an old earth" then reread the creation story. Have a concordance ready and draw your own conclusion.
I can tell you this much, the Bible never claims the earth was created 6-10,000 years ago. The fact that mindless followers buy that crap is less that impressive to me. These are the same fools who said the earth is the center of the universe.

God is never wrong. Sadly so called Christians are rarely correct.
TIFWIW
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#63
#63
orangeslice13 said:
I'm never sure if you're serious but you appear to be this time. If so go read David Smoke's "A. Biblical case for an old earth" then reread the creation story. Have a concordance ready and draw your own conclusion.
I can tell you this much, the Bible never claims the earth was created 6-10,000 years ago. The fact that mindless followers buy that crap is less that impressive to me. These are the same fools who said the earth is the center of the universe.

God is never wrong. Sadly so called Christians are rarely correct.
TIFWIW
Click to expand...

in other words, yes, you do have to jump through some hoops to understand that the Creation Story is not to be taken literally
 
#64
#64
MG1968 said:
in other words, yes, you do have to jump through some hoops to understand that the Creation Story is not to be taken literally
Click to expand...

Ask and you will receive. Seek and you will find. Knock and it will be opened.
If you want to know put in some work. If not don't.
I sorted threw alot of books and drew my own conclusions you can to.


IMO science teaches an old earth. The creation story while never intended to teach age is consistent with an old earth as well.


How did we get to this from an unscientific museum?
 
#65
#65
orangeslice13 said:
Ask and you will receive. Seek and you will find. Knock and it will be opened.
If you want to know put in some work. If not don't.
I sorted threw alot of books and drew my own conclusions you can to.


IMO science teaches an old earth. The creation story while never intended to teach age is consistent with an old earth as well.


How did we get to this from an unscientific museum?
Click to expand...

just so we're clear, I'm agnostic and believe the universe is billions of years old, I can read Hawkings, Sagan or any of a number of others that will come right out and say it and not engage in flowery obfuscation that is subject to interpretation.
 
#66
#66
MG1968 said:
just so we're clear, I'm agnostic and believe the universe is billions of years old, I can read Hawkings, Sagan or any of a number of others that will come right out and say it and not engage in flowery obfuscation that is subject to interpretation.
Click to expand...

If that's what you're in to.
I'm all for reading to further Yourself.
It's important to know what you believe and why.
 
#67
#67
MG1968 said:
just so we're clear, I'm agnostic and believe the universe is billions of years old, I can read Hawkings, Sagan or any of a number of others that will come right out and say it and not engage in flowery obfuscation that is subject to interpretation.
Click to expand...

Serious question. What does this mean to you? I get different answers from people who refer to themselves this way and I'm just curious what you think.

For example TRUT says there is a God, or was, but he doesn't know who God is or if He cares about us.(paraphrased)




**This is not a trap or a trick**
 
#68
#68
I think agnosticism is more about differentiating between belief and knowledge. Specifically, that the existence of the paranormal and metaphysical cannot be known.
 
#75
#75
I believe what I believe. I study the universe and the knowledge others have been able to extract from it because it interests me. I too read Sagan and Hawking and theories produced from their rivals. I think in the end when it's all boiled down to the simplist element they are both trying to work their way back to the same starting point via different methods spiritual versus scientific.

I consider myself a Christian but many of my beliefs do not really fall into the mainstream Christian beliefs. Ironically there will be those from both sides who would say my beliefs are idiotic, simply because I keep an open mind and welcome new ideas both scientific and religious arenas of thought. So be it, I am what I am, and I believe what I believe.

I really don't have much time for literalist preaching. I believe the bible to be a guide of sorts and different people will take different meaning from the messages and words contained in it, as I've gotten older I started to believe it was meant to be this way. The problem is these differences cause friction between so many factions unable to let sleeping dogs lie. They'd rather bicker about which belief is better than accept and consider other points of view, doesn't really make sense to me.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top