first off im a ravens fan so i like purple! so your bunny god seems logical lol. on a serious note it all goes back to common sense if you see a painting you know it was painted by a painter. if you see creation you know it was created by a creator. if i got on this forum and said that my house is perfectly level, and my house is perfect for people to live in, and ohh yeah one more thing there was no builder or designer. i would be called stupid more times than you guys call me that already.
serious question for evolutionist,
by unstopableravens 220 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
J. Hofer
and if you see a koala you know they didn't walk to australia from the middle east.
-
-
KateWild
unstop,
and ohh yeah one more thing there was no builder or designer. This is from Heb 3.4. We are all JWs and not buying the same rubbish we have been tought for years.
I am not an evolutionist, because I am not a fundementalist. I believe that God and evolution are not mutually exclusive. Unstop, do you think God and evolution could be compatible?
Kate xx
-
LisaRose
If God magically transported the Koalas from Australia and back to Australia, why did we need the ark in the first place, why not magically transport Noah, his family, and all the animals to safe pace for the duration of the flood? For that matter why even do a flood in the first place, why not just kill all of the troublesome humans? If God is going to destroy millions of humans at the big A, why couldn't he have killed the few humans alive at that time? It seems like it would be a lot less work.
-
LucidChimp
I don't mind if you believe in god/design. But that video is why you shouldn't ever use the argument you just did to support your belief.
-
caliber
and if you see a koala you know they didn't walk to australia from the middle east. Why not just leave the Koala bears right where they started ?
The Flood as universal insofar as mankind was concerned since the human race was reduced to eight souls only, but local insofar as extent is concerned since man was at that time still confined to a comparatively small geographical area.
So we begin with a brief examination of the Hebrew word
(eretz) which is translated "earth," as in Genesis 6:4, 5, 6, 11, 12, etc. According to Young's Analytical Concordance, the Hebrew word is translated "country" 140 times, "ground" 96 times and "earth" and "land" frequently. It is also rendered "field" once and by several other words in a very small number of instances. Assuming that Young's list is exhaustive, actual count shows that the word is translated "earth" about 677 times and translated "land" 1,458 times. Moreover, of the 677 occurrences, in at least one hundred instances the word may be equally, if not more appropriately, rendered "land" rather than "earth." Whereas in the cases where it is translated "land" in the English, the instances in which "earth" would have been more appropriate are rare. That is to say, the choice of "earth" or "land" as a translation of the original in any particular instance is a matter of context: and on the whole, if we exclude the account of the Flood, usage elsewhere shows that the context favours the word land rather than earth. To put this another way, Hebrew writers evidently employed the word with its much more restricted meaning about four times as frequently as they employed it with a broader meaning. Where they wished to make it absolutely clear that they meant "earth" in the sense of soil, the word (adamah) was used, as for example in Genesis 2:5, "there was not a man to till the ground." And where they wishedEffects of the Curvature of the Earth
Because of the curvature of the earth, the horizon drops from where the viewer is standing. However, the drop is proportional to the square of the distance between the viewer and an object on the horizon (Young nd). From these relationships, it can be seen that a tribal chief (or Noah) standing on the deck of a large boat (Ark), perhaps 7.8 meters above the water,would not be able to see the tops of any hills as high as 15 m from as little as 24 km away across flood plains covered with water because the curvature of the earth prevents it (See the Appendix for examples of calculations). Most hills in this region that are as much as 15 m high are more than 95 km away from the river levees. Therefore, the survivors of the Flood could see only water in all directions while they were floating down the Tigris River and over the flood plains. Many of these hills would also be partly covered with water which would make their tops project less above the water level, and therefore, the curvature of the earth would make them disappear from the line of sight in even a shorter distance than 24 km.
Jeremiah 4:27 his is what the LORD says: "The whole land will be ruined, though I will not destroy it completely.
GOD'S WORD® Translation
This is what the LORD says: The whole earth will be ruined, although I will not destroy it completely. -
bohm
Unstop: you see a painting you know it was painted by a painter. if you see creation you know it was created by a creator.
And if i hear thunder I know it was created by a thunderer?
we know how complex life arose from simple life. We know how our solar system arose. We know how our galaxy arose. We know how even the atoms that make up the universe arose. Thats so far our knowledge take us. Time and time again people have assumed what they saw could only be created by a God, only to be prooven wrong.
If God made everything, where did god come from? you will properly tell me thats a poor question; it is perfectly natural to assume a god that can do anything on a whim exist, despite nobody ever observing a god doing anything. Why is it then a leap of logic to assume some natural cause, a much simpler thing which we have plenty of examples of, gave rise to our universe? what solid evidence is there to support either assumption?
-
MadGiant
" point is, god created you and if god was not real, than you would not be here."
Really?
-
adamah
Unstop: you see a painting you know it was painted by a painter. if you see creation you know it was created by a creator.
Yeah, but God fails the "Intelligent Designer" criteria, since the Bible repeatedly confirms that God is ignorant of "His" own design (Eg modern science has failed to confirm the existence of a metallic half-dome firmament serving as a roof over the Earth to which the Stars, Moon and Sun are attached so they can travel across it's surface).
9:56 
(eretz) which is translated "earth," as in Genesis 6:4, 5, 6, 11, 12, etc. According to Young's Analytical Concordance, the Hebrew word is translated "country" 140 times, "ground" 96 times and "earth" and "land" frequently. It is also rendered "field" once and by several other words in a very small number of instances. Assuming that Young's list is exhaustive, actual count shows that the word is translated "earth" about 677 times and translated "land" 1,458 times. Moreover, of the 677 occurrences, in at least one hundred instances the word may be equally, if not more appropriately, rendered "land" rather than "earth." Whereas in the cases where it is translated "land" in the English, the instances in which "earth" would have been more appropriate are rare. That is to say, the choice of "earth" or "land" as a translation of the original in any particular instance is a matter of context: and on the whole, if we exclude the account of the Flood, usage elsewhere shows that the context favours the word land rather than earth. To put this another way, Hebrew writers evidently employed the word with its much more restricted meaning about four times as frequently as they employed it with a broader meaning. Where they wished to make it absolutely clear that they meant "earth" in the sense of soil, the word 
(adamah) was used, as for example in Genesis 2:5, "there was not a man to till the ground." And where they wished