[__ Science __ ] The Flood, what happened?

[Quantrill]

are you saying there is a difference between Word and word - Father and father - God and god?

so repeatedly saying "the Bible is the word of God" and refusing to say "the Bible is the Word of God" are two vastly different things?

if someone said repeatedly "i believe in god" but refused to say "i believe in God" i would think there is some funny business going on

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking.

A Muslim will say, we believe in Jesus. Really? What Jesus? Not the Jesus of the Bible.

Barbarian has never said, yes, the Bible is the Word of God. Why? Because he doesn't believe the Bible is the Word of God. He believes what he can 'show' and 'prove' scientifically is the word of God. Which means his god is science. Not God.

Quantrill

 

[Barbarian]

I am not asking you to 'show me'.

I get that. I've shown you repeatedly, but you are still not willing to concede the fact. So until you address what I said the last several times, when I said that the Bible is the word of God, you're done here. When you address those times, we'll talk.

 

[Barbarian]

so repeatedly saying "the Bible is the word of God" and refusing to say "the Bible is the Word of God" are two vastly different things?

Only if you don't think "word" means what it says. God's word is not God.

Never Worship the “word,” Always Worship the “Word”
...
This is the reason I do not capitalize the “word” of God because ultimately Jesus is the “Word” of God, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning” (John 1:1-2). It’s interesting to note that the Scriptures, when referring to themselves with the term “word” do not capitalize it, “I will not neglect your word” (Psalm 119:16).

Why I Don’t Capitalize the “word” of God

“And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen, and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent. You search the Scriptures because you think that in them […]

applygodsword.com

Worship only God, not His word. Jesus is the Word of God, according to His word, and we should not give the worship to a book that we give to God Himself.

 

[Quantrill]

I get that. I've shown you repeatedly, but you are still not willing to concede the fact. So until you address what I said the last several times, when I said that the Bible is the word of God, you're done here. When you address those times, we'll talk.

Is the Bible the Word of God. Simple yes or no. Quote your post and statement where you said the Bible is the Word of God.

Quantrill

 

[Truthfrees]

the Bible is the word of God.

the Bible is the word of God

the Bible is the word of God

the Bible is the word of God

the Bible is the word of God

Is the Bible the Word of God. Simple yes or no. Quote your post and statement where you said the Bible is the Word of God.

Quantrill

i gathered all the quotes where he said the Bible is the word of God after you asked him to declare

before you started asking him i couldn't find any post where he made that declaration

 

[Quantrill]

i gathered all the quotes where he said the Bible is the word of God after you asked him to declare

before you started asking him i couldn't find any post where he made that declaration

Yes, and even the quotes are incomplete sentences. Which means something else is said along with them showing he is referencing something which he said before.

And if you go back and look at them, you will see he never said 'Yes, the Bible is the Word of God." It is always connected with what he has 'proved' by his science.

Quantrill

 

[Truthfrees]

Yes, and even the quotes are incomplete sentences. Which means something else is said along with them showing he is referencing something which he said before.

And if you go back and look at them, you will see he never said 'Yes, the Bible is the Word of God." It is always connected with what he has 'proved' by his science.

Quantrill

imo the real issue is evolution can't be proven

true science has facts that are best explained by a worldwide flood and a Creator

evolution has so many holes in it's theology/theory that pretty much void it as a valid theology/theory

i say theology because it really is by faith not science that evolution is presented - no observable macro evolution (a monkey becoming a man for example) has occurred in the 5k+ years man has been on the earth observing and recording

 

[kiwimacahau]

imo the real issue is evolution can't be proven

true science has facts that are best explained by a worldwide flood and a Creator

evolution has so many holes in it's theology/theory that pretty much void it as a valid theology/theory

i say theology because it really is by faith not science that evolution is presented - no observable macro evolution (a monkey becoming a man for example) has occurred in the 5k+ years man has been on the earth observing and recording

It would help if you were engaging with the actual ToE. No "monkeys became men"; Great Apes and Humans share a common ancestor. Humans have been recording since 3400 BCE and while most have some kind of flood mythology, we know that there almost certainly wasn't one, worldwide flood.

 

[Barbarian]

imo the real issue is evolution can't be proven

It's directly observed. Perhaps you have a different definition than the scientific definition? What do you think biological evolution is?

true science has facts that are best explained by a worldwide flood and a Creator

There's no evidence whatever for a worldwide flood, nor does scripture say there was. But the question "why is there something, rather than nothing?" is best answered by a Creator. That isn't a scientific issue, however.

evolution has so many holes in it's theology/theory that pretty much void it as a valid theology/theory

The reason that evolutionary theory is a theory is that, like every other scientific theory, it makes predictions that have later been repeatedly verified. There are still a lot of answers to be found, but I'd be interested in knowing what "holes" you have to show us, regarding the theory.

i say theology because it really is by faith not science that evolution is presented

We can test that assumption. Of the four basic points of Darwinian theory, which of those remains unconfirmed?

no observable macro evolution (a monkey becoming a man for example)

If that happened, evolutionary theory would be in trouble. Monkeys are far too evolved in their own direction to have given rise to humans. However, macroevolution is readily observable and has been documented from time to time. Macroevolution is defined as evolution that produces new species. Even many creationist organizations have now conceded this fact.
macroevolution /MACK-rō-EH-və-LOO-shən/ n. The production during the course of evolution of new forms of life treated as distinct species.

Biology Dictionary - M

Biology Dictionary - M to MYOSIN: Meanings of biology terminology and abbreviations starting with the letter M.

www.macroevolution.net

Many creationists now concede the evolution of new species, genera, families, and occasionally orders. They've just redefined it as "not real evolution", even though it involves a change in genes in the population, which is what evolution is.