:lol:Quote:
Originally posted by Captain Vegetable
Rock-on, 7's!
You just keep getting better and better...maybe I should bow out and let you handle this? ;)
Printable View
:lol:Quote:
Originally posted by Captain Vegetable
Rock-on, 7's!
You just keep getting better and better...maybe I should bow out and let you handle this? ;)
Go, Hero! Go, Hero! Get stupid! It's your birthday!
P.S. Read your PMs, dude. ;)
Quote:
Originally posted by Captain Vegetable
Go, Hero! Go, Hero! Get stupid! It's your birthday!
P.S. Read your PMs, dude. ;)
OMG!!! ROTFLMAO!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :jest: :jest: :lol: :jest: :lol: :jest: :lol: :lol:
*wipe tears from eye*
and on that note I gotta go to work. Working a late shift today so don't be mad if I don't respond.:D
Hero: It's Occam's Razor, and I don't believe most reputable scientists claim to have any answers for why the Bang occurred or what preceded it. Science plainly cannot answer the question of intelligent creation, at least at this time, and probably not ever. What science has shown is that the Biblical story of creation 5000+ years ago is more than likely inaccurate.
You can believe what you like. There\'s simply no evidence of the existence of a higher intelligent power. And there\'s no reason to believe that scientists have anything to lose if such evidence surfaced. Unlike clerics, who have every reason to dispute scientific findings.
I could have sworn we already cleared up this nasty bit...Oh well. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by burgundy
What science has shown is that the Biblical story of creation 5000+ years ago is more than likely inaccurate.
All science shows is that the Earth is older than 5000+ years. And as I've explained before, that doesn't mean it wasn't created 5000 years ago.
Adam was a adult when God created him. Eve was an adult. All of the animals were created in adulthood.
God created not a single thing in it's infancy. Therefore, it stands to reason that God created the Earth as an adult. Just because the Earth is billions of years old, doesn't negate creation taking place 5000 years ago.
Another take on creation is that when the Bible describes God creating the animals, fishes, birds, and man, it never says how many times prior to man God had created life on the planet. It never numbers His creations, which means there's a lot of room for all science has to offer.
:D
CV: That's a possibility, but when given the choice between "The Earth was created 5 billion years ago," and "The Earth was created 5000 years ago in a state that indicates it was created 5 billion years ago," Occam's Razor makes the likely answer pretty clear.
And, doesn\'t the Bible prohibit tossing in all these possibilities and interpretations that aren\'t in the text itself?
Exept that Occam's Razor is thoroughly ignored in any other case in science.
Your statement is null because the entire scientific community ignores Occum concerning creation. They prefer the more complex explanation of the Big Bang and evolution and the inherantly impossible circumstances surrounding them, rather than God created everything.
You can't just evoke it when it suits you.
So, the real definition of Occum's Razor is this: The most simple answer is usually the correct one...but only if it suits me!
No. The book of Revelation alone forbids the adding to and taking away from it\'s pages. Not the rest of the Bible.Quote:
Originally posted by burgundy
And, doesn\\\'t the Bible prohibit tossing in all these possibilities and interpretations that aren\\\'t in the text itself?
Besides, am I adding anything? Or am I simply deftly reading between the lines?
There are mountains of evidence backing up the Big Bang theory and evolution and almost none behing the Biblical story of creation. Thus, the two theories are not otherwise equal, and the Razor does not apply.
Is that an accepted interpretation of Revelation - that it only applies to itself, and not to the rest of the Bible? I recall it invoking the plagues of Egypt, among other things, but like I said, I'm not one to argue biblical details with you.
For the purpose of clarity, Occam\'s Razor states that all other things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
I don't buy it. "All else being equil" simply means all which isn't involved in the assessment. Evedence ways not one way nor the other when applying the Razor.Quote:
Originally posted by burgundy
There are mountains of evidence backing up the Big Bang theory and evolution and almost none behing the Biblical story of creation. Thus, the two theories are not otherwise equal, and the Razor does not apply.
And even still, it makes no difference.
Simply to satisfy my curiousity, what is the evedence? I'll not turn this into a debate, I am genuinely curious.
Yes, it is a widely accepted interpretation. And yes, it applies only to the book of Revelation. Here's the verses:Quote:
Is that an accepted interpretation of Revelation - that it only applies to itself, and not to the rest of the Bible? I recall it invoking the plagues of Egypt, among other things, but like I said, I'm not one to argue biblical details with you.
Revelation 22:18-19
"And I solemnly declare to everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: If anyone adds anything to what is written here, God will add to that person the plagues described in this book. And if anyone removes any of the words of this prophetic book, God will remove that person's share in the tree of life and in the holy city that are described in this book."
Note the highlight. This prophetic book, i.e. Revelation.
Age of the Earth: Fossil records, C-14 dating, half-lifes of radioactive isotopes, geologic strata records, etc. There's literally mountains of it.
Age of the Universe: "Red shift," traces of thermal waves. The Big Bang theory is just that - a theory - and may well be wrong, but even if it is, Biblical creation isn't the next most likely explanation.
If there's any evidence that creation occurred the way the Bible says it does (or even at the time it says is does), please point me to it. CV - there may be explanations to back up your beliefs, but there's evidence to back up mine.
Regarding Revelation: "God will add to that person the plagues described in this book." - Are the Plagues described in Revelation? Because if they aren't, the only sensical interpretation of "this book" is the entire Bible.