- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do you think human giants ever roamed this earth?
Posted on 1/5/25 at 8:28 am to rattlebucket
Posted on 1/5/25 at 8:28 am to rattlebucket
quote:
We as Christians believe He had just created everything out of nothing. Why would it be hard to believe he was able to make 2 of every kind walk to the ark? Creation museum does a great job laying this out plainly
Do you really believe this…deep down inside?
Creationism Museum? I would love to take a stroll around that place…where would find such a place?
1
Posted on 1/5/25 at 1:52 pm to PurpleSingularity
Posted on 1/5/25 at 5:08 pm to Globetrotter747
Sounds like you got it all figured out. Mystery solved. Good job.
Posted on 1/5/25 at 5:52 pm to Prodigal Son
How is our free will limited?
Posted on 1/5/25 at 7:03 pm to jeffsdad
quote:
How is our free will limited?
Only by the choices available to us. That doesn’t excuse us from being responsible for our decisions, it just means that the choices that are available to make are some combination of factors within and beyond our control.
Posted on 1/5/25 at 7:05 pm to Prodigal Son
Example?
Posted on 1/5/25 at 7:32 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
Creationism Museum? I would love to take a stroll around that place…where would find such a place?
I have been to the Ark Encounter. It’s a hoot.
quote:
Sounds like you got it all figured out. Mystery solved. Good job.
Thank you.
Posted on 1/5/25 at 7:33 pm to jeffsdad
We’re born.
Posted on 1/5/25 at 8:50 pm to Lickitty Split
Posted on 1/6/25 at 6:20 am to Prodigal Son
quote:
Sounds like you got it all figured out. Mystery solved. Good job.
You are wrong.
People like me who subscribe to the theory of evolution and the big bang theory DO NOT have it all figured out. They are called theories for a reason. Nothing has been proven. We continue to have questions and continue searching for answers to fill in the gaps.
However, we all tend to agree that creationism makes no sense.
Posted on 1/6/25 at 7:59 am to bird35
quote:
While this is true, people relied on their armor to protect them from projectiles. Until the battle of Agincourt in 1415 there were not arrows that could penetrate armor, and only the longbow could and only people who trained daily from the age of four could shoot a longbow to penetrate armor. It wasn’t until the crossbow that the common soldier could penetrate armor.
We know the armor was good then because when David was given the Kings armor he could barely walk, and my guess is Goliath had some really nice armor.
Goliath was cocky enough to leave a rock size hole in his headgear which requires a perfect shot
You do realize armor of that time was not metal. It was boiled leather or linen.
Posted on 1/6/25 at 9:52 am to Stinger_1066
quote:
People like me who subscribe to the theory of evolution and the big bang theory DO NOT have it all figured out. They are called theories for a reason. Nothing has been proven. We continue to have questions and continue searching for answers to fill in the gaps.
I respect that. But, do you think that this truly represents the majority opinion of secular science? If so, and nothing has been proven, then why do we teach only one potential explantation (scientific materialism/naturalism) to the questions of the origin of the universe and life? Moreover, why do we ridicule and suppress dissenting views on subjects that still have no definitive answers?
Have you ever watched Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed ? There are absolutely legitimate challenges to the current paradigm of secular science, being brought forth by some of the most brilliant minds in their respective fields, and they are being suppressed and dismissed without sufficient debate. This documentary exposes how some of these great minds have been punished for merely suggesting that the science is not settled. The current scientific paradigm is one that crushes dissent, and refuses to allow itself to be challenged on the battlefield of ideas. That behavior more closely reflects someone who can’t afford to be wrong, rather than someone who’s truly confident that they have arrived at their conclusions by effectively and thoroughly eliminating all other possible explanations- based solely on the merits of observable and repeatable scientific inquiry.
Has evolution ever been observed in a laboratory? Are there any repeatable experiments that prove the veracity of macro evolution?
The Big Bang- The universe had a beginning. Nothing created everything? All of space, time and matter spontaneously created itself? Out of nothing?
Christians almost always are accused of being science deniers- which is absolutely true regarding an indeterminable number of believers. But, to act as though it’s a requirement for belief is just plain dishonest. Modern science owes its very existence to Christianity- as it was men like Kepler, Newton and Boyle etc who believed in the laws of nature, because they believed in the Law Giver.
Posted on 1/6/25 at 12:00 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
I respect that. But, do you think that this truly represents the majority opinion of secular science? If so, and nothing has been proven, then why do we teach only one potential explantation (scientific materialism/naturalism) to the questions of the origin of the universe and life? Moreover, why do we ridicule and suppress dissenting views on subjects that still have no definitive answers?
If that didn't truly represent the majority opinion of secular science, then they would no longer be referred to as theories. They either have been disproven, or referred to as laws.
Those theories are generally accepted, but there are still gaps that need closing before they can be considered to be laws.
quote:
Modern science owes its very existence to Christianity
Only in the sense that Christian institutions were the only sources of higher learning. If the church had it its way, the idea that Earth is the center of the universe would still be being pushed.
Posted on 1/6/25 at 1:28 pm to Stinger_1066
quote:
Those theories are generally accepted, but there are still gaps that need closing before they can be considered to be laws.
Agreed. But I think you’re downplaying the degree of authority with which these theories are disseminated to young, impressionable minds and all but ignoring the underlying motivations behind these claims.
quote:
Only in the sense that Christian institutions were the only sources of higher learning.
And why was that? Because only the Christian worldview provided the necessary conditions for modern scientific inquiry? Namely that an unchanging and eternal God created the universe, and created us in His image with the ability to understand what He’d done? They could expect order in nature because of who God is. They considered it a form of worship. That is why we have modern science.
quote:
If the church had it its way, the idea that Earth is the center of the universe would still be being pushed.
Nah. They realized their mistake and corrected. I’m not defending the Church of Rome. But it’s interesting that you bring that into the discussion as some sort of gotcha.
Posted on 1/6/25 at 1:48 pm to Lickitty Split
It was common for plains indians to be seven feet tall. Seven point five wasn't unusual. Before humans developed plant agriculture 20,000 years ago humans were much taller and had brains larger by one third. We degenerated after we started eating plants. Modern processed foods made us much weaker.
Posted on 1/6/25 at 3:52 pm to Prodigal Son
quote:
Agreed. But I think you’re downplaying the degree of authority with which these theories are disseminated to young, impressionable minds and all but ignoring the underlying motivations behind these claims.
I'm not downplaying it. You're overstating it. You're looking for a bogeyman where one doesn't exist.
There are no "underlying motivations" other than to ensure we never go back to a time when theology took precedence over science. Like a mere 500 years ago.
quote:
And why was that? Because only the Christian worldview provided the necessary conditions for modern scientific inquiry? Namely that an unchanging and eternal God created the universe, and created us in His image with the ability to understand what He’d done? They could expect order in nature because of who God is. They considered it a form of worship. That is why we have modern science.
No. The Christian church controlled who was authorized to learn. There was a long period of time where no one except the clergy were taught to read. So obviously anyone with a thirst for knowledge would become a clergyman. It was the only way to learn anything.
Who knows how much more quickly society would have advanced scientifically if the church had not restricted learning to only clergymen?
The church was an impediment to the advancement of science.
Have you noticed how much more quickly we've advanced since the influence of the church has been diminished?
This post was edited on 1/6/25 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 1/6/25 at 5:45 pm to Stinger_1066
quote:
People like me who subscribe to the theory of evolution and the big bang theory DO NOT have it all figured out. They are called theories for a reason. Nothing has been proven. We continue to have questions and continue searching for answers to fill in the gaps.
Scientific theories attempt to explain a group of related facts. They do not graduate to become laws or facts themselves. That’s misunderstanding the term.
Two scientists might disagree vehemently about certain aspects of evolution while still supporting the theory as a whole as if it is as factual as anything else.
Evolution can be modified (even significantly) without the entire theory being discarded.
The reality of evolution is not seriously questioned by mainstream scientists.
quote:
respect that. But, do you think that this truly represents the majority opinion of secular science? If so, and nothing has been proven, then why do we teach only one potential explantation (scientific materialism/naturalism) to the questions of the origin of the universe and life? Moreover, why do we ridicule and suppress dissenting views on subjects that still have no definitive answers?
Because creationism is not testable and deities have no basis in reality as we know it.
If God is an acceptable answer in scientific circles, then why can’t someone on a murder trial claim innocence because he says his hand was forced by Satan? Why can’t someone say spirits of ancient priests push Halley’s Comet around the solar system?
If God or the supernatural is relevant or acceptable for A, why not B, C, D, E, etc.? Where do you draw the line? Why can’t we fill in all gaps with the supernatural?
quote:
The current scientific paradigm is one that crushes dissent, and refuses to allow itself to be challenged on the battlefield of ideas. That behavior more closely reflects someone who can’t afford to be wrong, rather than someone who’s truly confident that they have arrived at their conclusions by effectively and thoroughly eliminating all other possible explanations- based solely on the merits of observable and repeatable scientific inquiry.
If “all possible explanations” includes the supernatural and the free use of miracles to support any outrageous claim that isn’t possible by known natural means, then how is anything ever eliminated?
quote:
Has evolution ever been observed in a laboratory?
What sort of evolution are you expecting in a laboratory?
quote:
Are there any repeatable experiments that prove the veracity of macro evolution?
The best evidence, in my opinion, is the fossil record.
How does creationism explain that 99.9% of all known species that have existed are extinct? Did the Creator introduce new species randomly through ages? Should we expect this to continue? Why did it create so many species that could not handle their environment to the present day? Might thousands of previously unknown animals comparable in size to elephants appear out of nowhere in North America tomorrow?
And regarding Christianity specifically, why were there eons of death before mankind showed up to introduce “sin” into the world? Why was early man forced to live in a scary, harsh, unforgiving world through no fault of his own?
How does Noah’s Ark fit in? How did a man live to be hundreds of years old and round up every species on Earth to survive a flood there’s not enough water to produce?
How many miracles are we supposed to allow before we can stop taking something seriously?
Posted on 1/6/25 at 6:50 pm to Stinger_1066
quote:
I'm not downplaying it. You're overstating it.
Is that an objectively true statement, or is that just your opinion?
quote:Am I? Is that an objectively true statement? Or is that just your opinion?
You're looking for a bogeyman where one doesn't exist.
quote:
There are no "underlying motivations" other than to ensure we never go back to a time when theology took precedence over science. Like a mere 500 years ago.
I bet you consider yourself an unbiased observer. Amirite?
quote:
No. The Christian church controlled who was authorized to learn.
Now that’s an extraordinary claim. Do you have extraordinary evidence to back it?
For this claim to be true, no one must have learned anything without church approval? Moreover, I find it quite ironic that you would use this argument- given the current state of affairs in scientific funding. It would do you some good to watch Expelled. At least you would be informed on the position you are straw-manning. quote:
There was a long period of time where no one except the clergy were taught to read.
And you know this how? You don’t. You would have to have first hand knowledge of every occurrence of someone learning to read in order for your statement to be anything other than a statement of faith.
quote:
So obviously anyone with a thirst for knowledge would become a clergyman. It was the only way to learn anything.
Yes. Obviously. Of course. Because… reasons?
quote:
Who knows how much more quickly society would have advanced scientifically if the church had not restricted learning to only clergymen?
Interesting yet unsurprising take. I would ask who knows how much more quickly society would have devolved- as that seems to be exactly what has happened since atheism became the squeaky wheel in modern society. That’s just my opinion though.
quote:
The church was an impediment to the advancement of science.
Agreed. But, it’s not the gotcha that you think it is, and it does nothing to change the fact that modern science was absolutely born out of a love and appreciation for God, which was imparted to us through Jesus Christ. So, there’s that.
quote:
Have you noticed how much more quickly we've advanced since the influence of the church has been diminished?
Is that supposed to be another gotcha? You really need to work on those. Do you realize that universities, hospitals, charities and science only exist because of Christianity?
There it is. I just realized the problem. You are conflating the church with Christianity. You are attacking the church, and I am defending Christianity. Look, I’m not here to defend the thoughts and actions of professing Christians of any cohort. So, unless you have some grievance against the core teachings of Christ- then I don’t think our conversation will be very productive.
Page 21 of 21
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News