That is the most ironic thing I have ever read… Thanks for that!!! 
Ironic not. Typing on an android smart phone yes
Yes, and that’s a good thing. But there’s so much bad science that he doesn’t critique, and much he actually endorses.
That’s your take; I submit you are unqualified to judge.
What is this “certian arthropod”? There are in fact no arthropods in the lowest level of the fossil record. And no, I don’t see a problem. Extinction happens.
I’m willing to bet that they seem that way only to a committed creationist. I don’t think you’re capable of arguing for any of them.
Gotcha. So really, (again) this as this experiment called “peaceful science” proceeds, we are finding that the disagreeable nature between creationists and evolutionists is really not a disagreement on science. It is a disagreement of volition. If one chooses to not see a Creator within the fabric of the evidence, then by golly i dont think he will ever choose to see Him. I am not sure how one grapples with the existence of mass energy as a materialist. To me, this seems to resemble a more a suppression of volition against the existence of a living God more than it does anything related to science. To me, if one chooses to allow their volition follow their science about the existence of mass energy, that volition should tend towards ablding by creation science, not naturalistic evolutionism.
Better run. I have stirred the pot. I hate no one. I love everyone. “Love delights in the truth” i wish i could meet you face to face and you could see my demeanor (80% of communication is non verbal) as not a guy judging and arrogant, but by His grace caring and never interested to make waves for their own sake. Good rest of wknd sir. (I had lotsa time today bc i had a power surge in our TN house that killed power so i had to drive down to fix…easy fix so i had time to kill so here i have been)
Ironically, I disagree. I think it’s a disagreement of epistemology. But your epistemology doesn’t hold water. If we can’t trust human reason, how can you trust your own basis for belief? Is your faith true solely because you have faith that it’s true? Is it that circular?
Are you sure you haven’t smoked it instead?
I watched the video and pointed out a flat out lie Wise told about the fossil record. Like a good little Creationist you ignored Wise’s dishonesty and keep right on preaching his nonsense. Why should we take anything you or Wise claims seriously?
So? Before the Permian mass extinction there were close to 20,000 species of trilobites which existed while there are zero alive today. Why do you think that’s a problem for evolution?
4 Likes
We
Well i had check in. Isnt this so great to have these deep discussions!? I mentioned im here in Tn where a built a shower of a light colored main body of tile with a darker accent across the upper half. I grouted all with a neutral grout. I wish i could send a pic…if you would see, the grout betw the light colored tiles appears in my highly rational perspective 5 shades darker than the grout between the darker accent. And its the same grout! The basis of my reasoning for determining the color of grout through my sense of sight was guided by my experience as determined by those senses…and in a completely stupid little test of how rational i really am, i failed not 1 or 2 shades, but by many shades. The show brain games has such experiments. An epistomology built on rational is not that easy to pin down.
So the word “rational” is a tricky one. When it comes to belief in our Creator who made creation and our existence, i have chosen an epistomology that is a balance of engaging the rational mind, and trusting in a God my rational mind as helped along by God Himself, who transcends human rationale. This is a paradox and is seen throughout Scripture.
It first starts off with, im here and mass energy exists, so the idea of a Creator is rational. The eternality of mass energy is irrational.
Secondly, the history surrounding Jesus Christ raising again from the dead and all of the OT prophecies such as in Isaiah 53, Ps 22 and others, i have rationally chosen to believe this to be true based on evidence (lots of good books by McDowell and others) . I might add, that as a Christian, i believe that God helped to open my heart to trust and receive what my brain was relaying to me to be true. So i became a new creation when i trusted Jesus for the forgiveness of sin and reconciliation to God.
But i have to say that the one other ingredient in this faith that helped me to believe it to be true was that it made propositions that were not at all rational. There are things about the Christian faith that are opposite of human experience…such as the weak are strong, the first last, you must choose God but ultimately He must draw you, God was never born and will never die, God exists outside of time, God created mass energy when it cannot be created or destroyed. Etc. There is a mystery element in the Christian faith that is threaded through scripture. One of my favorites is over the issue of Gods sovereignty. Paul is arguing with the Greek philosophers at the time about this. The philosophers argue, if God is sovereign, then why are we to be blamed if we dont choose Him. Then the conversation turns to why God in His sovereignty allowed Jews to reject the chosen Messiah en masse while many gentile converts arose. Paul, a Jew himself who said He loves his fellow Jews so much that he’d willingly give up his salvation if it meant they would gain it gave some perspective on how this historical twist came to be. But here is the part i love in his ultimate conclusion about why Jews rejected the Messiah and many gentile converts in Ro 11:
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
35 “Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”
36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.
If someone came up to me and said, “The true faith is God helps those who help themselves” i would run away laughing my head off at the ridiculousness of such a man made faith! I wont mention any names, but the largest church in America has a leader who abides by this form.
So from all of that, i just dont know that an epistomology that rationally agrees that the creation was created by a Creator and concludes that the discovery of His creation actions are going to be rational from a vantage point of the puny perspectives that are summoned through the senses of man even via science is very wise. In fact, i might be less likely to truly believe in a God who was fashioned in a way that met every one of my senses acceptable norms.
Im curious though- you are obviously smart and have to realize that the existence of mass energy in the fashion of only the expanding cosmos must engage a strong conviction of a incredibly powerful all consuming and supreme Creator of it. You are seeming to suggest that i am quite irrational in my thinking. But would it be okay if i asked you to explain your obvious pushback on the idea of the existence of a powerful sovereign Creator when by far the best evidence in the universe about anything points to the fact that He exists? I think we may have crossed this path before …and if this feels intrusive, ignore.
Sorry, but I respond poorly to logorrhea. Could you edit that a bit to limit it to what you actually want to say?
1 Like
You say that my epistomology lacks sense. Philosophers have written volumes on the topic. Quite impossible to narrow the writting to fairly handle a rebuttle towards the strength of your accusation that my epistomology is irrational. But at the end i ask a question i would wonder if you mind considering. If this feels intrusive, ignore
Simple enough: there is no such evidence. The big bang is not evidence for a “powerful sovereign Creator”. Further, if there were such a thing, you would have no reason to connect it to your particular god.
1 Like
I dont mean to pry, but i am just very interested to understand your way of thinking. If the cosmos consists of a large amount of mass energy and is becoming disorganized, what is the rational scientific explanation of its existence without the existence of Something outside the natural causing it who eternally exists - exactly what Scripture declares. You say the big bang, but all this does is kicks the can deeper into the past and accomplishes nothing…what energized the big bang? If one cannot answer this with any legitimacy, not only do they contradict many of the conclusions of some of the most famous philosophers who point to the sensibility of an ultimate authority, but are a sort of scientist hypocrite who says that they abide by a materialistic philosophy that rides on scientific rationalism, but really does not at its very roots. The logs daming the stream of thought in your camp need to be cleared away before you have the right to question any comparably small splinters in the epistemological stream i abide by.
This is a question for a physicist. Philosophers, no matter how famous, may not be the best authorities.
2 Likes
I disagree. The most basic of all physical laws that govern the universe that you suggested are constants worthy of our every bit of attentiveness completely obliterate any suggestion of the eternality of mass energy. When physicists deciphered that in their calculations, the universe had a beginning, they were surprised but should not have been because this found exacting agreement with laws of entropy. What this suggests is that the science that chooses a materialistic philosophy to guide it implodes on itself. If the materialistic scientist is a representative of such monumental disjunction with reality tries to call out a creationist scientist for his bad science and illogical epistomology, it is like a 300 lb jockey riding a donkey at the KY derby giving the winner of the race advise.
Im sorry if that sounds insensitive. All of that then the same materialist tells me that morality is guided by what the cultural norm of the day is. First of all, if this is true, then he should be glad, not irrate if one day more than half of the populous approves of the overturning of roe vs wade. But secondly, my mind wants to explode with the utter lack of anything sane by such a proposition the same because this means that someday if this culture accepts the idea that a newborn baby causes strife to his parents it is justifiable to snuff its life and can thought of as perfectly “moral”
The very ones who are promoting these philosophies are the ones telling us that naturalistic universal common decent is fact. And they serve as an apologetic for the whole hearted approval and applause of the oposing group of the thousands of creationist scientists who are doing such great work.
I truly do not care.
1 Like
Physical laws (laws of physics) do not govern the universe. Particles do not consult those laws to decide how to behave. The laws are part of our attempt to describe the universe. But it is surely a mistake to say that they govern the universe.
It is beyond the ability of physics to do that.
Physics gives us a way of describing the universe. If our way of describing the universe can be extrapolated to the entire universe for the entire time, then that implies that the universe had a beginning. However, it is still very possible that our way of describing the universe is limited and cannot be extrapolated to everywhere and every time.
1 Like
Are you trying to say that just because we cannot understand by the laws physics how the energy of say our sun that is being dispersed and scattered to an unusable form can accomplish the feat of creating a new sun, we should not completely write off that it could be possibly occur? And i am charged as a flake that uses illogical circular reasoning for trusting in God as Creator.
Can you at least understand why we believe these discussions are more on volition and less science?
I’m not trying to say anything beyond what I did say.
Yes, that because you are deeply committed to dubious theology which you see as contradicting science.
1 Like
Yes- Im deeply committed to my faith in God. Im also deeply committed to people. We are all in the same boat. And we are not just blobs of molecules and atoms concocted by the random forces of time, chance and energy. If it is rational to conclude that existence of energy points to a Creator of it and incredulous bio complexity points to a Designer, this makes for the likelihood of a gift of incredible value. On a foundation of such value comes mounting goodness! Hard to explain this, but i know goodness in the God i serve and part of this gift is to pass knowledge about Him on to others.
Enjoy your day. Good to see the sun shining again around here!
First, you are making an argument from pleasant consequences, which is invalid. Second, once again you assume that a Creator must be the particular one you’re thinking of, which does not follow from the premise.
1 Like
Then it is a bit disappointing to see him repeating bad science, such as the supposed quick formation of coal somehow supports a young Earth. It only takes me 5 minutes to make a sandwich, but that doesn’t mean the Earth is 5 minutes old.
That’s a bit like saying that there are eukaryotes in Cambrian deposits. Since humans are eukaryotes, this must mean humans were found in Cambrian deposits.
3 Likes