The Creationism Museum

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Ok, that was a bit of rambling, but here's the thing about why I believe the Bible's literal take on a 6 day creation story.

Is that 6 earth days, or martian days or mercury days or alpha centauri days or what?

To me, it doesn't matter because all the arguments that say "A ha, it couldn't have been 6 days because..." put God into a box where they assume he's bound by the same laws he created for us. I'd assume earth days, it's implied in the Bible, but even if it's not, it doesn't really matter as I understand it.
In engineering, it's always important to get your units straight. If I say "5," ok, great. 5 what? 5 pounds? 5 yards? 5 chickens? God has been referred to as one of the greatest engineers of all time, yet he can't keep the basics straight?

When the Bible was supposedly inspired/dictated/hallucinated from God, he knew we were limited beings. He should have known that units were important.

At the time the Bible was written, we didn't know anything about how old the Earth really was. To say it's 6000 years old, and that the world was created in 6 days, it wasn't a problem. But as science started to say, "Wow, this place is REALLY old!", we ventured back into "god of the gaps" territory. Suddenly a "day" wasn't a "day" anymore. It needed to be something different, in order to make it fit the new scientific evidence, and so that it wouldn't sound quite as loony. Religion itself has evolved over the years. How ironic. :)
As science keeps exposing as false what religion has held to be true, religion keeps on covering its own butt by saying, "Well here's what we really meant..." Theists also needed to become lawyers, and redefine what the meaning of the word "is" is.

The flaw in the argument against a 6 day creation is they purposefully confuse God taking 6 days to create the earth, approx 6000 years ago with the Bible saying everything is and will appear 6000 years old.

As I said, there is no contradiction in a 6 day creation, the amount of time God used to create the universe or what the finished product looks like has nothing to do with what the finished product will look like to our perception.
Then your god is a liar, and we have even less reason to believe anything else about him.

I do take your point though, and why I believe the Bible is literally true when it says God created the earth and the heavens in 6 days. There is a lot of ridicule in the world over this, but there is no logical or scientific evidence that contradicts the BIble. What you do see is man gaining more knowledge about the world around him and becoming more and more prideful.
Says the guy too proud to admit that he willfully believes a lie.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: Duwelon

I do take your point though, and why I believe the Bible is literally true when it says God created the earth and the heavens in 6 days. There is a lot of ridicule in the world over this, but there is no logical or scientific evidence that contradicts the BIble. What you do see is man gaining more knowledge about the world around him and becoming more and more prideful.

There are actually mountains of evidence that our planet is more than 6,000 years old.
 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: Jeff7
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Ok, that was a bit of rambling, but here's the thing about why I believe the Bible's literal take on a 6 day creation story.

Is that 6 earth days, or martian days or mercury days or alpha centauri days or what?

To me, it doesn't matter because all the arguments that say "A ha, it couldn't have been 6 days because..." put God into a box where they assume he's bound by the same laws he created for us. I'd assume earth days, it's implied in the Bible, but even if it's not, it doesn't really matter as I understand it.
In engineering, it's always important to get your units straight. If I say "5," ok, great. 5 what? 5 pounds? 5 yards? 5 chickens? God has been referred to as one of the greatest engineers of all time, yet he can't keep the basics straight?

When the Bible was supposedly inspired/dictated/hallucinated from God, he knew we were limited beings. He should have known that units were important.

At the time the Bible was written, we didn't know anything about how old the Earth really was. To say it's 6000 years old, and that the world was created in 6 days, it wasn't a problem. But as science started to say, "Wow, this place is REALLY old!", we ventured back into "god of the gaps" territory. Suddenly a "day" wasn't a "day" anymore. It needed to be something different, in order to make it fit the new scientific evidence, and so that it wouldn't sound quite as loony. Religion itself has evolved over the years. How ironic. :)
As science keeps exposing as false what religion has held to be true, religion keeps on covering its own butt by saying, "Well here's what we really meant..." Theists also needed to become lawyers, and redefine what the meaning of the word "is" is.

The flaw in the argument against a 6 day creation is they purposefully confuse God taking 6 days to create the earth, approx 6000 years ago with the Bible saying everything is and will appear 6000 years old.

As I said, there is no contradiction in a 6 day creation, the amount of time God used to create the universe or what the finished product looks like has nothing to do with what the finished product will look like to our perception.

I do take your point though, and why I believe the Bible is literally true when it says God created the earth and the heavens in 6 days. There is a lot of ridicule in the world over this, but there is no logical or scientific evidence that contradicts the BIble. What you do see is man gaining more knowledge about the world around him and becoming more and more prideful.

Ah, god of the cracks again, "Science is proving our beliefs to be wrong (or need to be modified), BURN THE HERETIC". Though your statement isn't that extreme, that is where the line of thinking goes and has gone in the past. And don't assume I'm painting all religious people with the same brush, just people like you. Some of the greatest scientists where extremely religious people and the world owes much to them, but we will never know just how much was robbed from humanity by people of similar mind to you.

Now don't get me wrong, those who say "ZOMG, THERE IS NO GOD" are a bunch of idiots, but what makes your religion so special that all others are wrong and the universe is shaped according to your book that MAN wrote, not god or Jesus but average Joe Smho.

Now prove to me Jesus wasn't a con artist first, then I'll start to take you more seriously. I don't actually think he was a con artist, but can you prove he wasn't? The first answers I can think of would be people and places from the bible that really existed, but it only proves that the people who had a hand in writing the bible lived long enough ago to know of these places and people. As for the medicals, short of a time machine we will never know.

It is easy to go waving around the "God did it!" stick to explain what is in the bible, but can you verify the accuracy of the source martial for all which you believe? Yes, FAITH is the answer! Of course, and I can have faith that you are a homosexual, and if questioned I can say "God told me so!" and you will never prove to me or anyone else that I am wrong (you may convince them I'm wrong, but public opinion does not make it fact).

Science seeks to explain the world around us. People may chose fields that will discredit cretin religious beliefs, but the scientific method doesn't care one way or another, it is cold, unfeeling, unthinking and uncaring. Those claiming to be men of science but refuse to except new evidence and/or change their minds are flaming retards to but it bluntly, a true scientists will look at a experiment and say "WOW, this proves everything we know about X is wrong, this is amazing."

On a final note, I'm ok with you believing whatever you want, just don't expect any respect from me. You have entered into a debate so don't be too offended by me questioning what you believe. However if you throw away all evidence that contradicts your beliefs without even a casual glance and yell "THIS IS THE TRUTH", then you are my enemy. Willful ignorance does no one good except those who seek to exploit it.

 

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
Oh and to get back on topic a bit, as I said before I'm ok with people who believe in creationism to make a attraction that depicts their beliefs, but I draw the line at misinforming people which I'm pretty sure will happen. Those wort thing that could happen is to expose children to this and say "this and right and everything else that says otherwise is wrong". You can brain wash kids with that kind of crap and this seems aimed towards that with all the movie quality props, now if you wait till they are old enough to think for themselves and say "why is that right?" and all is fine, I'd even buy a ticket and enjoy the ride.
 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
Six days of creation and a day of rest equals the magic number seven. Same number of readily observable objects in the sky for the ancients. Same number of holes in the human head. Just mythology in my opinion. No reason to believe otherwise.
 

Mr. Lennon

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
3,492
1
81
Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
I'm sure this has been posted before, but I was inspired to post it again by the ignorant fools in the creationism vs evolution thread. How they managed to find idiots willing to throw 25 million at them to create this fairy tale center is absolutely fucking amazing.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wzjjxi7f0Oc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_Museum
http://www.creationmuseum.org/

Nice thread! Most here know I have a strong dislike for religion. But your words give you away as being the same as they are.

You should know this! OK. Almost all so called christians fundamentally believe the words that Christ spoke. Whether you believe in God or NOT. The Words Of Christ will live till the dawn of a knew time. Why are Christ words so powerful.? Because they teach us as a RACE of People how to live in order that we should not destroy ourselves. Salvation for believers and non believers alike. But religion has twisted the Word.

So you just keep on hating just like those who hide behind religion . Rather than ware the armor of TRUETH.

OP get a grip. Let each believe what he will. None here sit in judgement.

Because I find something idiotic....that equals hate? I could care less what people wish to believe in...but I draw the line at humans riding dinosaurs. Yes, I dislike religion, but I hold absolutely no hateful feelings towards those who wish to follow it. I followed it as a Catholic for 22 years.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Duwelon
unless you really believe God doesn't exist, then you're just dumber than a box of rocks.
Being called dumb by a moron who believes the earth is 6,000 years old doesn't really have much bite behind it.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: Duwelon
The flaw in the argument against a 6 day creation is they purposefully confuse God taking 6 days to create the earth, approx 6000 years ago with the Bible saying everything is and will appear 6000 years old.

As I said, there is no contradiction in a 6 day creation, the amount of time God used to create the universe or what the finished product looks like has nothing to do with what the finished product will look like to our perception.

I do take your point though, and why I believe the Bible is literally true when it says God created the earth and the heavens in 6 days. There is a lot of ridicule in the world over this, but there is no logical or scientific evidence that contradicts the BIble. What you do see is man gaining more knowledge about the world around him and becoming more and more prideful.
Six days is ridiculously long when you're a god. Simply snap your fingers and create it instantly, or suffer thousands of years of ridicule for such a retarded little fairy tale.
 

Babbles

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2001
8,253
14
81
I read an interesting anti-creationist argument is as follows: A day on Earth is defined as the length of time the Earth rotates on it's axis (pretty simple and people should agree on this). However according to Genesis Earth was created on Day 3. Therefore how can there be a Day 1 and Day 2 if it is effectively impossible to define days until Day 3 when the Earth is created. In order for Days 1 and 2 to exist there must be some external reference point to define a 'day' however we define a day based on Earth's rotation.
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Duwelon
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: Duwelon
I believe the Bible's literal take on a 6 day creation story

thank you, I was unaware of your belief in this matter. I can safely skip your posts now.

have a nice day

Close minded coward.

No friend, that's you. You believe in something without rhyme or reason, thus neither rhyme or reason can convince you of anything other than what you believe. Discussion with you is completely pointless because you are 100% incapable of changing your beliefs. If I believed in leprechauns, what would be the point of you trying to convince me they didn't exist? Simply put, you couldn't. Science, on the other hand, unlike religion, encourages changes in "belief/understanding" as new evidence and discoveries comes to light. Science allows for change as our understanding of the universe deepens. That you continue to cling to a 6 day creation story despite present day knowledge of our universe shows how closed minded you are.

To sum up, if I told you I thought the tooth fairy was real, and you said that you weren't going to engage me in discussion about it, and I called you a closed minded coward, well that's about how insulted I feel when you call me that.
 

BMW540I6speed

Golden Member
Aug 26, 2005
1,055
0
0
The whole issue of Creationists v.s. evolutionists is really about religion and all the baggage it has. If IDers were to accept evolution and the facts about the age of the earth they would be denying part of the bible fantasy about 6 days and the earths start-date, allegedly 6000 years ago. Once that happens all bible fantasies of both testaments would be wide open to question. This would shake Christianity, Judaism and most of all, Islam.

Given that Christianity has managed to outmaneuver common sense for the last 2000+ years, playing on peoples fear of death - something that is not going to go away, it is going to take a real epiphany to change minds especially the simple ones.

Most organized religions are merely a bureaucratic highjacking and exploitation of spiritual concepts for the benefit of the bureaucracy, which are usually wealth and power. The ID idea is specifically designed to insert religious dogma and a fundamentalist view of the world into the classroom. Anyone who says differently is just plain dishonest or terribly ignorant of the motives of the ID community. ID is not a testable theory. Its a simple restatement of fundamentalist beliefs cloaked in pseudo-scientific jargon.

What amuses me is that so many "white" Americans are obsessed with Hebrew *cough*Middle Eastern*cough* mythology. And here I thought in a post 9/11 world all brown skinned people were terrorists/tools of Satan?

Isn't it odd that the Creator of All Mankind seemed to prefer the browns skinned people (the entire Bible is exclusively Arabs. No white people anywhere) - and basically ignored everyone in the white skinned Scandinavia? Seems like an odd decision for an inclusive deity, but okay.

Is it just a quirk of history that our nation has become uniquely obsessed with the creation mythology of Middle Eastern tribesman?

Why aren't we obsessed with "proving" that the Roman creation myth is the true science?

Why aren't we obsessed with the creation mythology of Ubangi tribesman in central Africa?

For the Literalist Bible Creationist (or I.D. revisionist) to claim franchise on the answers is as presumptuous and narrow-minded as the cosmologist claiming to know what we all realize after considerations cannot be known. The issue doesn't appear to be the biblical account of genesis. The problem is with these modern neanderthals who seem to think, that a day to God is some twenty-four hour period to name the first issue that springs to mind. There is nothing wrong with the story of creation per se, the issue is thinking that it is meant to be taken literally.


 

Mr. Lennon

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2004
3,492
1
81
Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
The whole issue of Creationists v.s. evolutionists is really about religion and all the baggage it has. If IDers were to accept evolution and the facts about the age of the earth they would be denying part of the bible fantasy about 6 days and the earths start-date, allegedly 6000 years ago. Once that happens all bible fantasies of both testaments would be wide open to question. This would shake Christianity, Judaism and most of all, Islam.

Given that Christianity has managed to outmaneuver common sense for the last 2000+ years, playing on peoples fear of death - something that is not going to go away, it is going to take a real epiphany to change minds especially the simple ones.

Most organized religions are merely a bureaucratic highjacking and exploitation of spiritual concepts for the benefit of the bureaucracy, which are usually wealth and power. The ID idea is specifically designed to insert religious dogma and a fundamentalist view of the world into the classroom. Anyone who says differently is just plain dishonest or terribly ignorant of the motives of the ID community. ID is not a testable theory. Its a simple restatement of fundamentalist beliefs cloaked in pseudo-scientific jargon.

What amuses me is that so many "white" Americans are obsessed with Hebrew *cough*Middle Eastern*cough* mythology. And here I thought in a post 9/11 world all brown skinned people were terrorists/tools of Satan?

Isn't it odd that the Creator of All Mankind seemed to prefer the browns skinned people (the entire Bible is exclusively Arabs. No white people anywhere) - and basically ignored everyone in the white skinned Scandinavia? Seems like an odd decision for an inclusive deity, but okay.

Is it just a quirk of history that our nation has become uniquely obsessed with the creation mythology of Middle Eastern tribesman?

Why aren't we obsessed with "proving" that the Roman creation myth is the true science?

Why aren't we obsessed with the creation mythology of Ubangi tribesman in central Africa?

For the Literalist Bible Creationist (or I.D. revisionist) to claim franchise on the answers is as presumptuous and narrow-minded as the cosmologist claiming to know what we all realize after considerations cannot be known. The issue doesn't appear to be the biblical account of genesis. The problem is with these modern neanderthals who seem to think, that a day to God is some twenty-four hour period to name the first issue that springs to mind. There is nothing wrong with the story of creation per se, the issue is thinking that it is meant to be taken literally.

Easily the best post in this thread. I couldn't of said it better myself.


I have a little story for everyone.

My little brother loves to collect different types of rocks. One time he decided to bring some petrified wood to a Christmas party at my grandma's house. Well one of my uncles is what I would refer to as a Christian extremist (Duwelon would easily fall into this category). The only difference between him and a Muslim extremist is that my uncle doesn't kill people.When he showed the petrified wood to my uncle, he looked at him sternly and said, "You know they just put that in our rivers and forests to make you believe that the earth is older than 6000 years." The rest of my family heard this and just laughed him out of the room. Even though my family is Catholic, they still accept science. It just pains me to see such ignorance, and that my uncle teaches that ignorance to his children.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
The whole issue of Creationists v.s. evolutionists is really about religion and all the baggage it has. If IDers were to accept evolution and the facts about the age of the earth they would be denying part of the bible fantasy about 6 days and the earths start-date, allegedly 6000 years ago. Once that happens all bible fantasies of both testaments would be wide open to question. This would shake Christianity, Judaism and most of all, Islam.

Given that Christianity has managed to outmaneuver common sense for the last 2000+ years, playing on peoples fear of death - something that is not going to go away, it is going to take a real epiphany to change minds especially the simple ones.

Most organized religions are merely a bureaucratic highjacking and exploitation of spiritual concepts for the benefit of the bureaucracy, which are usually wealth and power. The ID idea is specifically designed to insert religious dogma and a fundamentalist view of the world into the classroom. Anyone who says differently is just plain dishonest or terribly ignorant of the motives of the ID community. ID is not a testable theory. Its a simple restatement of fundamentalist beliefs cloaked in pseudo-scientific jargon.

What amuses me is that so many "white" Americans are obsessed with Hebrew *cough*Middle Eastern*cough* mythology. And here I thought in a post 9/11 world all brown skinned people were terrorists/tools of Satan?

Isn't it odd that the Creator of All Mankind seemed to prefer the browns skinned people (the entire Bible is exclusively Arabs. No white people anywhere) - and basically ignored everyone in the white skinned Scandinavia? Seems like an odd decision for an inclusive deity, but okay.

Is it just a quirk of history that our nation has become uniquely obsessed with the creation mythology of Middle Eastern tribesman?

Why aren't we obsessed with "proving" that the Roman creation myth is the true science?

Why aren't we obsessed with the creation mythology of Ubangi tribesman in central Africa?

For the Literalist Bible Creationist (or I.D. revisionist) to claim franchise on the answers is as presumptuous and narrow-minded as the cosmologist claiming to know what we all realize after considerations cannot be known. The issue doesn't appear to be the biblical account of genesis. The problem is with these modern neanderthals who seem to think, that a day to God is some twenty-four hour period to name the first issue that springs to mind. There is nothing wrong with the story of creation per se, the issue is thinking that it is meant to be taken literally.

Easily the best post in this thread. I couldn't of said it better myself.


I have a little story for everyone.

My little brother loves to collect different types of rocks. One time he decided to bring some petrified wood to a Christmas party at my grandma's house. Well one of my uncles is what I would refer to as a Christian extremist (Duwelon would easily fall into this category). The only difference between him and a Muslim extremist is that my uncle doesn't kill people.When he showed the petrified wood to my uncle, he looked at him sternly and said, "You know they just put that in our rivers and forests to make you believe that the earth is older than 6000 years." The rest of my family heard this and just laughed him out of the room. Even though my family is Catholic, they still accept science. It just pains me to see such ignorance, and that my uncle teaches that ignorance to his children.

yeah, your uncle is a nut.

That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: Corbett
That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

Science has proven that the earth (and the universe) are older than 6,000 years.


BTW, you ignored my earlier question. Exactly how long was a day on earth before the earth and the sun even existed?
 

jonks

Lifer
Feb 7, 2005
13,918
20
81
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
My little brother loves to collect different types of rocks. One time he decided to bring some petrified wood to a Christmas party at my grandma's house. Well one of my uncles is what I would refer to as a Christian extremist (Duwelon would easily fall into this category). The only difference between him and a Muslim extremist is that my uncle doesn't kill people.When he showed the petrified wood to my uncle, he looked at him sternly and said, "You know they just put that in our rivers and forests to make you believe that the earth is older than 6000 years." The rest of my family heard this and just laughed him out of the room. Even though my family is Catholic, they still accept science. It just pains me to see such ignorance, and that my uncle teaches that ignorance to his children.

yeah, your uncle is a nut.

That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

Science hasn't disproven the existence of the microscopic alien vs predator war that takes place on the tip of your nose while you are sleeping either. But if you believe that's what happens when you close your eyes, you and his uncle should get together and go bowling.
 

ruu

Senior member
Oct 24, 2008
464
1
0
Originally posted by: Corbett
science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

I'm pretty sure that the scientific community and the spiritual/religious/creationist community use the word "proof" in entirely different contexts and entirely different ways and expect entirely different things when one group or the other asks for "proof."

The two different expectations are entirely incompatible. Science will never "prove" anything in the Bible, right or wrong, because science doesn't use the same definition of "proof" that believers in the Bible think/want? science to use.
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
Originally posted by: Duwelon


The flaw in the argument against a 6 day creation is they purposefully confuse God taking 6 days to create the earth, approx 6000 years ago with the Bible saying everything is and will appear 6000 years old.

As I said, there is no contradiction in a 6 day creation, the amount of time God used to create the universe or what the finished product looks like has nothing to do with what the finished product will look like to our perception.

I do take your point though, and why I believe the Bible is literally true when it says God created the earth and the heavens in 6 days. There is a lot of ridicule in the world over this, but there is no logical or scientific evidence that contradicts the BIble. What you do see is man gaining more knowledge about the world around him and becoming more and more prideful.

OMG! The ignorance of some people astounds me.

Lets assume that there is a higher power that created the universe (and I do believe that there is a higher power) - What makes you think that the words written in the bible by ignorant men thousands of years ago? What makes you vain enough to even claim to know anything about god , what he wants, thinks or does? Rediculous.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Corbett
That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

Science has proven that the earth (and the universe) are older than 6,000 years.

Chapter and Verse where the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old?

Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, you ignored my earlier question. Exactly how long was a day on earth before the earth and the sun even existed?

I didn't ignore anything but my answer is, I have no friggin' clue how long a day on earth was before the earth and sun even existed.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Zeppelin2282
My little brother loves to collect different types of rocks. One time he decided to bring some petrified wood to a Christmas party at my grandma's house. Well one of my uncles is what I would refer to as a Christian extremist (Duwelon would easily fall into this category). The only difference between him and a Muslim extremist is that my uncle doesn't kill people.When he showed the petrified wood to my uncle, he looked at him sternly and said, "You know they just put that in our rivers and forests to make you believe that the earth is older than 6000 years." The rest of my family heard this and just laughed him out of the room. Even though my family is Catholic, they still accept science. It just pains me to see such ignorance, and that my uncle teaches that ignorance to his children.

yeah, your uncle is a nut.

That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

Science hasn't disproven the existence of the microscopic alien vs predator war that takes place on the tip of your nose while you are sleeping either. But if you believe that's what happens when you close your eyes, you and his uncle should get together and go bowling.

??? Sounds like YOU are the one who believes alien vs predator war takes place on the tip of your nose and are the one who should go bowling with that uncle.

In any case, feel free to respond to my earlier post you seem to have missed

Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: alien42
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: jonks
What exactly do you think his quote meant?
I think this quote meant like I said earlier, that segregation today is nothing compared to the segregation of the 60s when he made the comment. Meaning, the segregation of the 60s was forced on people who attended church, while today, the segregation in churches is voluntary.

We might be talking past each other. Who do you think I meant above when I said "his"? MLK or alien?

going by "segregation of the 60s when he made the comment" i would say he is talking about MLK, not me.

Yeah, I agree. But here's a longer clip of MLK's speech:

We must face the fact that in America, the church is still the most segregated major institution in America. At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing in Christ there is no east or west, we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation. This is tragic. Nobody of honesty can overlook this. Now, I?m sure that if the church had taken a stronger stand all along, we wouldn?t have many of the problems that we have. The first way that the church can repent, the first way that it can move out into the arena of social reform is to remove the yoke of segregation from its own body. Now, I?m not saying that society must sit down and wait on a spiritual and moribund church as we?ve so often seen. I think it should have started in the church, but since it didn?t start in the church, our society needed to move on. The church, itself, will stand under the judgement of God. Now that the mistake of the past has been made, I think that the opportunity of the future is to really go out and to transform American society, and where else is there a better place than in the institution that should serve as the moral guardian of the community. The institution that should preach brotherhood and make it a reality within its own body.

He's ticked off at the church for not taking the lead on ending segregation within its own purview, and if he came back today and saw the churches still 95% segregated he would express the same displeasure. In all likelihood it would probably depress him further, that even now when people have the free choice where to worship, they are just as divided as they were back when such division was mandated.

So now that you two believe you have made your point, would you care to explain what any of this has to do with the Creationist Museum?
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: ruu
Originally posted by: Corbett
science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

I'm pretty sure that the scientific community and the spiritual/religious/creationist community use the word "proof" in entirely different contexts and entirely different ways and expect entirely different things when one group or the other asks for "proof."

The two different expectations are entirely incompatible. Science will never "prove" anything in the Bible, right or wrong, because science doesn't use the same definition of "proof" that believers in the Bible think/want? science to use.

I think you are confusing faith with proof.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: ruu
Originally posted by: Corbett
science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

I'm pretty sure that the scientific community and the spiritual/religious/creationist community use the word "proof" in entirely different contexts and entirely different ways and expect entirely different things when one group or the other asks for "proof."

The two different expectations are entirely incompatible. Science will never "prove" anything in the Bible, right or wrong, because science doesn't use the same definition of "proof" that believers in the Bible think/want? science to use.

I think you are confusing faith with proof.
Exactly. Let people believe what they want. As for teaching Evolution, it's a Scientific theory so it has a place in the classroom. Creationism is not based on science so it has no place in the classroom unless it's part of some curriculum that also includes other religious beliefs, mysticism and mythologies.
 

mxyzptlk

Golden Member
Apr 18, 2008
1,888
0
0
Originally posted by: Corbett
I didn't ignore anything but my answer is, I have no friggin' clue how long a day on earth was before the earth and sun even existed.

Why don't you just say it's 1/6th the time it takes a god to make a universe?


Originally posted by: Corbett

Chapter and Verse where the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old?



It was my understanding that number came from adding up all ages of the people mentioned in the old testament going back from noah to adam.

edit: LOL, of course the creation museum also lists 6000 years as the dawn of creation.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Corbett
That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

Science has proven that the earth (and the universe) are older than 6,000 years.

Chapter and Verse where the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old?

The Ussher Chronology was appended to the KJV circa 1650.

Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, you ignored my earlier question. Exactly how long was a day on earth before the earth and the sun even existed?

I didn't ignore anything but my answer is, I have no friggin' clue how long a day on earth was before the earth and sun even existed.
[/quote]

So why insist they'd only be a day long? It is IMO ridiculous to interpret literally that which was clearly intended to be allegory.
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Corbett
That doesn't change the fact that science has not proven one thing in the Bible wrong yet.

Science has proven that the earth (and the universe) are older than 6,000 years.

Chapter and Verse where the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old?

The Ussher Chronology was appended to the KJV circa 1650.

Again, I'll ask you to post Chapter and Verse where the Bible says the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, you ignored my earlier question. Exactly how long was a day on earth before the earth and the sun even existed?

I didn't ignore anything but my answer is, I have no friggin' clue how long a day on earth was before the earth and sun even existed.

So why insist they'd only be a day long? It is IMO ridiculous to interpret literally that which was clearly intended to be allegory.
[/quote]

:confused: Are you talking to someone else because I never said that in this thread?
 

Corbett

Diamond Member
Jun 8, 2005
3,074
0
76
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
Originally posted by: Corbett
I didn't ignore anything but my answer is, I have no friggin' clue how long a day on earth was before the earth and sun even existed.

Why don't you just say it's 1/6th the time it takes a god to make a universe?


Originally posted by: Corbett

Chapter and Verse where the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old?



It was my understanding that number came from adding up all ages of the people mentioned in the old testament going back from noah to adam.

edit: LOL, of course the creation museum also lists 6000 years as the dawn of creation.

Again, I'll ask, what Chapter and Verse in the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old

HINT : The Creation Museum is not the Bible.