ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

StrongAxe's Blog Replies
Post a New Blog

Vote on StrongAxe as a helpful ChristiaNet blogger by clicking this link. Currently StrongAxe has 1492 votes. The higher the number of votes the more helpful this blogger is considered by the ChristiaNet community.


Satan On Over Drive
  
Steveng:

Mandatory vaccinations?! MILLIONS used to die of common disesases like polio, flu, etc. before, but since the invention of vaccinations, many diseases like polio and smallpox have been practically eradicated, and there are many fewer deaths from others like flu and measles.

At least that used to be true until the anti-vaxxine craze became popular. Now we are seeing resurgence of these diseases, and even POLIO, which had previously thought to be extinct.

As for "fake news", look at sites like InfoWars, whose host ADMITTED he fabricated lies saying Sandy Hook never happened and Sandy Hook parents were paid crisis actors - purely to boost his own ratings.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
David:

It wasn't that "Hitties didn't exist". It was "there was no scientific evidence that Hitties existed, so there is no way to know if they did or not", like Santa and Bigfoot. The only evidence was uncorroborated hearsay. The Bible itself discounts uncorroborated testimony - all truth must be established by "two or three witnesses".

Science relies on objective evidence, reproducible independent of the observer. Faith relies on trusting something without evidence. Different people believe different things. Because of different criteria, there are some things one can prove scientifically but some refuse to believe, and some other that some believe but have no scientific basis.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
jerry6593:

When you address my questions.


David:

That's not true. Science does not have an agenda to disprove God. Many scientists are Christians. It just does not have an agenda to PROVE God. It looks at physical evidence, an does not consider the Bible to be one, as alone, it is uncorroborated. It claims to be God's word, but how can one KNOW that's true? So do the Book of Mormon and Qur'an. Do you believe those on THEIR own say-so?

Scientists first disbelieved Biblical accounts of the Hittites, as no evidence of them was ever found. Later, evidence WAS found, so they were happy to believe in Hittites.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
David:

If heavier salt water separated from fresh water, it would be at the bottom, not middle. After rain, most would be fresh anyway. Why layering everywhere and not just Colorado? Slicing by water torrent must be during first 40 days, so when did the layering happen?

Scientific method examines evidence, then formulate and verifies/falsifies hypotheses, without pre-supposition, like exegesis ("Let us understand what the text says").

Young earth arguments begin with pre-supposition "Earth MUST be 6000 years old", then make observations fit that, like eisegesis ("Let us make the text say what we want").


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
jerry6593:

I was speaking about the subject of abiogenesis. I didn't say I had irrefutable scientific proof that a bunch of carbon atoms bonded together to make DNA. I doubt you have irrefutable scientific proof that a divine being uttered sonic vibrations that made DNA either.

Exactly. On earth, left-handed molecules happened to win out. There is no chemical reason why that would necessarily happen elsewhere. It's 50/50 which one would happen first.

Why does have to? Darwinism is only one part of the picture. How does the Genesis Flood narrative explain the millions of species we have now, given that there wouldn't have been room for two of each of them on the Ark.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
jerry6593:

I didn't say it produced life. It produced building blocks of life, which shows how organic chemicals are capable of self-assembly into more complex structures. The earth's early atmosphere wasn't full of oxygen as ours is now. Our oxygen-rich atmosphere is only as a result of photosynthesis, and that only happened after plants developed.

Organisms based on left-handed molecules need left-handed molecules, and ones based on right-handed molecules need right-handed molecules. If one kind got lucky, life would evolve from that kind before the other.

Darwinism speaks only about improvement of species, and evolution of species from others, NOT about creation of the first species. That is a totally different science.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
Samuelbb7:

Some creationists on here insist evolution contradicts Genesis 1 because the creation order is different, yet Genesis 2 also has a different order. They are consistent ONLY if order is unimportant.


jerry6593:

Aren't you doing the same? I mentioned several things, which you haven't explained yourself. You call my explanations lame. Can you do better?

Abiogenesis: scientists have conducted experiments where mixtures of basic substances (water, carbon dioxide, methane, etc.) were subjected to theorized ancient conditions (heat, lightning, etc.), and spontaneous synthesis of organic compounds like proteins and nucleic acids were observed to form over a period of mere decades.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
jerry6593:

Ad Hominem is a logical fallacy.

First, most that die are recycled (due to eating, decay, etc.) and very few become fossils. This is why there are gaps in the evolutionary record - many forms weren't fortuate enough to be preserved. Sudden encasing and preservation happens during cataclysmic events, like mudslides.

Second, it takes a very long time for mud to be compressed into sedimentary rock by subsequent layers - much slower than we can observe.

If one demands literal accuracy of Bible accounts, Genesis 2 creation story contradicts Genesis 1, and if Genesis factually inaccurate that early, what can one expect about later chapters?

Creationism may be comforting, but it's not science either.


Unmarried Couples Serve In Church
  
Samuelbb7:

You wrote: So true Strong ax. They condemn the sins they are not committing.

That can be bad (e.g. Jesus said, "Let he who is free of sin cast the first stone"), but it often gets even worse than that. Many of them condemn the sins in public that they themselves commit in private. Many of the same priests, pastors and evangelists (and politicians) who scream the loudest about various sexually-based sins are often caught in adulterous affairs, or with prostitutes, or with pool boys, or abusing children, or even arrested for trafficking children.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
Samuelbb7:

Since the flood covered the earth within the first 40 days, that means that any dead bodies that were around would have been dead for almost a whole year, and be badly decayed. Can you imagine anything that has been dead for a year without refrigeration?!


Unmarried Couples Serve In Church
  
Christians (especially very religious ones) are all too easy to condemn the more easily visible sins of the flesh (e.g. fornication), that Jesus himself didn't have too much to say about, while at the same time, they turn a blind eye to the less obvious but much more serious sins of the spirit, that Jesus did preach against constantly, like pride and covetousness.

Look at how many televangelists and megachurch pastors live in huge luxurious palatial mansions, and have have fleets of limousines, and private jets, and personal yachts - yet beg poor widows who watch them to send in money because they need yet another new private jet, and then guilt you into doing so because if you don't, you're "not showing your faith".


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
jerry6593:

Why do they occur in specific horizontal layers? Why would there be no trilobytes, then suddenly a uniform layer of trilobytes, and then no more trilbyte?

The literal biblical flood model says that it rained for 40 days, and then the flood settled for around a year. This means a sudden huge influx of water, followed by a long, slow settling. A bunch of varied horizontal layers with a huge gash carved in it suggests a long slow settling, followed by either a very long-term slow carving, or very fast cataclysmic one. Again, a river cutting through mud makes rounded edges, not sharp jagged ones like we see.

Again, what did animals eat for the first year after they disembarked?


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
jerry6593:

You wrote: David, the canyons were cut while the land was still flood mud.

How does "flood mud" explain many flat layers of different kinds of rock, layered one on top of the other, with marine fossils in some of them, and not others? If it were all flood mud, one would expect those fossils in all of the mud layers, but that isn't what we see. If it were soft, pliable mud, we would also see gooey rounded edges, not the sharp edges that are actually visible.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
David:

You wrote: In the sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon, you can find Marine fossils. The Colorado River didnt produce them, so how did they get there?

That just means that there are some layers of the rocks in the American southwest had been under water at some time in the past. It doesn't explain how layers of rock without marine fossils were deposited on top of those - which would also take millions of years.

If the Flood was strong enough to carve a V-shaped slice through that rock, how can that explain marine fossils radiating out sideways halfway up the walls?


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
Cluny and David:

I'm not saying ALL rivers carve canyons. Water moving over the ground causes erosion, that depresses the land. We see this with rivers and river deltas all the time. Mud flows and collapses, so if the land is depressed enough, the banks of the river will collapse and get carried away. Cliffs made of soft wet mud don't last long.

When rivers flow across solid rock, on the other hand, erosion is much slower, and the rock isn't soft. Rock cliffs can support themselves.

It is like the difference between using a chisel to carve a statue out of a piece of marble (which works very well) and using a knife to carve a statue out of soft butter (which doesn't work well at all, and if it does, it doesn't last long).


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
David:

We see erosion cutting rivers through mud, getting deeper over time. With rock it takes much longer (e.g. millions of years for the Grand Canyon). A similar process makes stalctites and stalagmites, one drop at a time, over millions of years, building rock spikes tens of feet long out of dissolved minerals.

Like lasanga, the GC exposes many rock layers deposited one on another over similar time periods.

A high power source (e.g. water hose or flood) erodes faster, but the resulting canyon pattern would look very different. It would also smash stalactites and stalagmites, rather than creating them.


Are Democrats Traitors
  
Haz27:

You wrote: KATHR. Your politically driven hate is blinding you to reality, again.

It is YOU who spew hatred and insult against the left and me, and everyone here who disagrees with you in every single message you post here.

Its Leftists who always play the victim.

It is YOU who are always playing the victim by whining about how the left controls the media.

You REALLY REALLY REALLY need to look at yourself in a mirror. Jesus said to remove the plank from your own eye before criticizing the speck in your neighbor's.

Talk about itching ears! You are so ready to hear ANYTHING AT ALL that vilifies the left, even without evidence.


Seashells On Top Mountains
  
David:

The Bible itself says heaven and earth declare the glory of God.

Miracles are when causes outside nature temporarily override natural law, but the results are natural. Miraculous healings leave humans whose bodies function normally. Multiplying fish feed people's bellies normally. Floods leave residue. Fire falling from the sky burn buildings and people normally leaving ash.

Science is making theories about how natural law works, and conducting experiments to validate those theories. Miracles and the hereafter are, by definition, outside of natural law, so science cannot and need not explain them. Science can't explain how the miracle happened, but it CAN analyze the normal aftereffects.


Are Democrats Traitors
  
Haz27:

You keep parroting Yuri Bezmanov like a broken record. This is truly how a brainwashed person behaves. Take a good look at your objectivity before you question the objectivity of others.

The reason why the left dominates universities is fairly obvious. The very essence of conservatism is protection of the status quo, and resistance to change. The essence of education is to teach people to think critically for themselves. When people analyze what they have been taught, and realize that it doesn't match reality, they change their perceptions. This is what liberal thinking does. Conservative thinking sticks its head in the sand, and rejects reality in favor of its own deluded preconceptions.



Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.