Why YEC can seem plausible

[Jimmy Higgins]

Perhaps the DNA is as some people suggest, was healthier and purer during those times which should therefore follow the direction of the entropic of universe, i.e. everthing including our genetics is degrading each generation which may mean "natural selection" could sound a little iffy.

Do you mean your god was going to make DNA behave differently in a few hundred years and he never warned them?. That DNA didn’t used o mutate, but god was going to make it start, and he warned them against wearing cloth made of two different fibers but not about the *new* dangers of incest?

What was his point? He thought it would serve them right to have disabled children? And those children, what, it served them right for being born?

Wow, that’s cold.

From the very beginning God warned Adam.

God say's, "Now that you've sinned in the world, from this day onward....

Death Now Applies!

Wow, what rubbish. Genesis 3:17-19 makes clear what the punishment was for man, woman, and the serpent. Death is not included. Any other interpretation is fan-fiction.

 

[Learner]

I was sort of hinting that rather than evolution it's devolution, that's happening through the generations, just as scientists who covers quite a few fields ( molecular-electronics to Organic chemistry) like Dr. James Tour who says (paraphrasing) " We do not "improve" genetically through time" (as the natural-selection process is said to do).

You familiar with the Covid-19 pandemic? Because the Delta strain immediately confirms the evolutionary process.

It's here as long as we are, I suppose.

 

[Learner]

From the very beginning God warned Adam.

God say's, "Now that you've sinned in the world, from this day onward....

Death Now Applies!

Wow, what rubbish. Genesis 3:17-19 makes clear what the punishment was for man, woman, and the serpent. Death is not included. Any other interpretation is fan-fiction.

Each to his own faith.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

From the very beginning God warned Adam.

God say's, "Now that you've sinned in the world, from this day onward....

Death Now Applies!

Wow, what rubbish. Genesis 3:17-19 makes clear what the punishment was for man, woman, and the serpent. Death is not included. Any other interpretation is fan-fiction.

Each to his own faith.

You aren’t talking faith, you are speaking fan fiction.

 

[Learner]

Each to his own faith.

You aren’t talking faith, you are speaking fan fiction.

I am a fan yes. Just that bit I'll agree with. Anything else in your opinion?

 

[Elixir]

Way back when I joined one of he old versions of the forum it was eye opening. It took a while to realize that these people are really serious. And that was scary. More so realizing they are in our Congress thinking that way.That s why I have participated here. It has to be opposed as a defense of our atheist , and others', freedoms.

Stupidity holds an actual appeal for the weak that can never be approached by honest examination of reality. Once the straw has been grasped, most would rather drown than let go.

 

[ideologyhunter]

And after the big gulp of Kool Aid, the real magic of religion happens -- the transformations: the Bible is antislavery, although it's plainly pro-slavery; God is for love and mercy and forgiveness, although he made Hell; God isn't pro-genocide, although he commits and commands it; God hates abortion, although he kills more babies six chapters into his book than any human abortionist, ever, and later earmarks children of "the other people" for death; God loves all mankind, yet again, compiles a substantial list of peoples for his chosen people to exterminate; the chosen people are Jewish, as is God's son, who follows Jewish ritual and establishes an exclusively Jewish outreach, although you learn later that Judaism isn't actually God's religion after all, and you can forget their rituals, laws, and holy days.

 

[Learner]

You may have to wait for a Jewish response on that.

(Israelites were the chosen ones to be precise, but yes, Jews as well as other descendant of the 12 Israelite tribes would be too)

 

[Learner]

the nature of creation can be accurately determined by science methods. But... not yet , just as you indicated above, " neither science nor religion...etc.."

You went off the rails there bro. You left out the fact that I wasn't referring to creation, but rather to whether there exists "a singly embodied causal entity responsible for its [creation's] existence" Why did you leave that out?

Well I was referring to creation , it could be either. The understanding, that creation is synomynous with Creator. It doesn't matter.

As I previously was trying to say: Science method for determined accuracy ... not yet made !!

Because you were looking for some way to put religion on the same footing as science. They're NOT, when it comes to learning about "The Creation".

Not sure how you think thats the case. I know they're not the same. The clue is in one one of my previous posts, saying IOW, science is a neutral tool method, theists, who can also be scientists use it, just as not-theists can use it.

 

[funinspace]

Yeah, that was sort of my point. As well as later civilizations in Mesopotamia have obviously repeated and borrowed from the tales told by the earliest writers we have...aka the Sumerians.

Your post triggered something I remember some 20+ years or so ago, reminding me of people from Scotland, who wanted to learn an old Scottish heritage tradition that is forgotten in Scotland. It was an old tradition dance that is 'only retained' overseas in Nova Scotia. It's a phenomenon, that I suspect must be quite usual when people take those traditions even habits, to far off lands, whilst still retaining them many generations after.

I remember hearing of a similar thing when I went to the South Pacific many years ago. I learned there were people of a particular island, who speak with some a 200+ year old English dialect, or phrases. In the states there are places or a place (I can't remember off the top of my head) that still speak in a particular English accent .

What I'm alluding to here is: Hebrews were from the same area, and I don't think this is the type of issue that some people think, to be the "dambuster smashing" the Hebrew narrative. The stories are similar - Gilgamesh is like Nimrod of the bible, and there's the flood similarities. Hebrews coming from those areas around ancient Iraq and for them to have similar stories is not really borrowed or plagiarised imo.

No, not a dambuster smash, just another one of the 1000 pieces of the puzzle deconstructing a literal narrative...much like climate evidence, or the invisible Moses, what a weird Egyptian name...'son of'.

Like the Scotttish tradition being retained in a far off land from where it originated from and the the place of origin losing the details of traditions. I would say it was the same for the Hewbrews. Just as an instant response and quich thought, I'll also say: Text written on stones and rocks will always be dated older than texts written on papyrus and skins,in which these two writing mediums would need regular copying to new and very portable writing mediums for nomadic people to write down about their lives and customs, as they travel from place to place on great treks and journeys.

Yet Yahweh didn’t bother to nudge for a little bit stone help. The oldest Hebrew is about 3000 years old on some broken clay.

 

[Learner]

No, not a dambuster smash, just another one of the 1000 pieces of the puzzle deconstructing a literal narrative...much like climate evidence, or the invisible Moses, what a weird Egyptian name...'son of'.

Well hopefully with each piece there's a little resolve.

Yet Yahweh didn’t bother to nudge for a little bit stone help. The oldest Hebrew is about 3000 years old on some broken clay.

This 'stone help' would be to who's advantage?

If you look at it rhis way, this stone nudging seems to be more of a disadvantage to those faiths, so to speak. The question you could ask is : Who believes in Gilgamesh now, even though he's written in stone?


It seems God of the bible versus 'all those written in stone' is the most successful, I can see why He needn't bother nudging any stones when He will have had many believe in Him... still to this day.

 

[excreationist]

Vapour Canopy

For a Creationist, every solution to a problem raises two more problems.

Why did God create this life-extending canopy if he's just going to destroy it later?

https://answersingenesis.org/environmental-science/the-collapse-of-the-canopy-model/
Says "...the model fails biblically and scientifically..."
Also:
https://answersingenesis.org/environmental-science/state-of-canopy-model/

it is impressive that these calculations that make sure ancestors don't survive the flood may have been done without paper and pen.

I'm more impressed that people think the numbers can be relied upon in the first place. Some apologists wave it away under the banner of "oral tradition" while ignoring the immense problems that trying to orally retell accurate history for centuries can entail.

If you think that is impressive, what about people who think the flat earth verses can be relied upon... I am unaware of any verses in the Bible that contradict the idea that the earth is flat.

 

[James Brown]

If you think that is impressive, what about people who think the flat earth verses can be relied upon... I am unaware of any verses in the Bible that contradict the idea that the earth is flat.

Oh, that's easy. Just tell a YEC that the Bible is written from a flat-earth perspective. They'll quickly spout verses that show the Earth is 'round' like a ball (never mind that it could mean 'round' like a coin.) And they'll skewer any flat-earth verses by arguing A) those verses are just metaphorical or B) you're not reading them right. To admit that ancient authors may not have had the scientific knowledge that we have is unacceptable, because it undercuts the Bible being the "inspired" word of God. Lots of such arguments here.

I recall one poster on this very forum argued that God couldn't possibly tell the biblical authors the true shape of the Earth because it would have confused them beyond all reason. Apparently the ancient mind could grasp Heaven, Hell, and transubstantiation, but not the word 'sphere.'

 

[excreationist]

If you think that is impressive, what about people who think the flat earth verses can be relied upon... I am unaware of any verses in the Bible that contradict the idea that the earth is flat.

Oh, that's easy. Just tell a YEC that the Bible is written from a flat-earth perspective. They'll quickly spout verses that show the Earth is 'round' like a ball (never mind that it could mean 'round' like a coin.)

Yeah like I said it isn't contradicting a flat earth...
Maybe you mean:

Isaiah 40:22
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.

There is nothing in that verse that conflicts with the flat earth interpretation. If the earth is a ball, the throne would only be "above" some of the earth - to some people the throne would be to the side, and to others it would be below them. If they were grasshoppers on a flat earth, God would be able to see them, but on a ball some would be hidden by the earth. A tent could exist above a flat earth, but not really around a ball.

 

[Elixir]

And after the big gulp of Kool Aid, the real magic of religion happens -- the transformations: the Bible is antislavery, although it's plainly pro-slavery; God is for love and mercy and forgiveness, although he made Hell; God isn't pro-genocide, although he commits and commands it; God hates abortion, although he kills more babies six chapters into his book than any human abortionist, ever, and later earmarks children of "the other people" for death; God loves all mankind, yet again, compiles a substantial list of peoples for his chosen people to exterminate; the chosen people are Jewish, as is God's son, who follows Jewish ritual and establishes an exclusively Jewish outreach, although you learn later that Judaism isn't actually God's religion after all, and you can forget their rituals, laws, and holy days.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It doesn't contradict the stories.... e.g. by having Lamech only live to 777 he didn't end up surviving the flood....
Also apparently Hebrew is right-to-left because it originated when stone carving was used - it is impressive that these calculations that make sure ancestors don't survive the flood may have been done without paper and pen.

The stories not contradicting each other (which I don't even think is true) isn't the point. If I'm embellishing a story and moving around or adding details I can easily create a narrative that isn't self contradicting. What does that prove?

https://blog.pangeanic.com/right-to-left-languages
edit: might not be accurate/relevant

So you realize that a link isn't relevant, nor accurate, but decide to post it anyway? I don't get it.

And it's wrong. They're correct that the medium explains the direction of writing. But it's writing in clay with a triangular wedge. It's just easier going right to left. It's got nothing to do with hammer and chisel on stone. And it's so dumb. Why would it matter on stone if you hitting the chisel with your left or right hand? Why would it be safer going right to left?

...People don't normally have lives over 900 years....

The Bible only says that people from before the Flood lived to over 900 years. More recent people like Moses only lived to 120. So it agrees that people don't normally live that long.

But why would people before the flood live that long? It's the same species. I can't follow your logic.

 

[DrZoidberg]

From the very beginning God warned Adam.

God say's, "Now that you've sinned in the world, from this day onward....

Death Now Applies!

Wow, what rubbish. Genesis 3:17-19 makes clear what the punishment was for man, woman, and the serpent. Death is not included. Any other interpretation is fan-fiction.

When I was in Egypt and wanting something fun to read while on the beach I picked up the same kind of absurd book on fundamentalist Islam and they were bending over backward to shoehorn modern science into the Quran.

It's the same kind of logic. You can see anything in anything if you try hard enough. Learner, it doesn't prove anything other than the author of those books are creative. But always ridiculous.

The ancients had no idea about the mechanism of evolution. Charles Darwin was himself spectacularly wrong on exactly how genes are spread. If he didn't nail it, I'm pretty sure the authors of the Bible didn't either.

 

[excreationist]

The stories not contradicting each other (which I don't even think is true) isn't the point. If I'm embellishing a story and moving around or adding details I can easily create a narrative that isn't self contradicting. What does that prove?

I think having quite a few people that die within a couple of years of the flood for ancient people isn't "easy". (especially if they aren't an expert at numbers)
Or adjusting numbers from 130+ to 30+ to make Shem be alive when Abraham was rather than dying before is also a clever thing to do....
(see post #389)

So you realize that a link isn't relevant, nor accurate, but decide to post it anyway? I don't get it.

I said it "might not" be.... but anyway it turned out to be useful after you corrected me....

And it's wrong. They're correct that the medium explains the direction of writing. But it's writing in clay with a triangular wedge. It's just easier going right to left. It's got nothing to do with hammer and chisel on stone. And it's so dumb. Why would it matter on stone if you hitting the chisel with your left or right hand? Why would it be safer going right to left?

The point is that there is some reason why it is right-to-left. I wonder how easy it is to do sums with that method.... in Hebrew....

But why would people before the flood live that long? It's the same species. I can't follow your logic.

Well a point I have been making is that YECs have basic counter-arguments for just about everything including:
https://creation.com/living-as-long-as-methuselah
That was written by a chess champion chemistry doctor
Their arguments might be flawed but the point is that they are quite comprehensive and probably make sense to YEC readers....

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think having quite a few people that die within a couple of years of the flood for ancient people isn't "easy". (especially if they aren't an expert at numbers)
Or adjusting numbers from 130+ to 30+ to make Shem be alive when Abraham was rather than dying before is also a clever thing to do....
(see post #389)

What? I can't follow your logic

I said it "might not" be.... but anyway it turned out to be useful after you corrected me....

And it's wrong. They're correct that the medium explains the direction of writing. But it's writing in clay with a triangular wedge. It's just easier going right to left. It's got nothing to do with hammer and chisel on stone. And it's so dumb. Why would it matter on stone if you hitting the chisel with your left or right hand? Why would it be safer going right to left?

The point is that there is some reason why it is right-to-left. I wonder how easy it is to do sums with that method.... in Hebrew....

They did sums on wax tablets, or in sand or in ash dust on black tables. Cuneiform clay tablets started out as a kind of receipt and purchase contracts. You did your sums first somewhere else and then afterwards committed them to clay for posterity.

But why would people before the flood live that long? It's the same species. I can't follow your logic.

Well a point I have been making is that YECs have basic counter-arguments for just about everything including:
https://creation.com/living-as-long-as-methuselah
That was written by a chess champion chemistry doctor
Their arguments might be flawed but the point is that they are quite comprehensive and probably make sense to YEC readers....

Is this really the simplest explanation using Occam's razor you can come up with? What's the point of shoehorning modern science into a work of poetic myth written by people who weren't too careful about the details? Isn't it a better explanation that the authors of the Old Testament did what authors usually do? They didn't see themselves as historiographers. They saw themselves as hagiographers. The point was to convince other people of the greatness of their God. Not to write the actual truth.

This thread is about how YEC can seem plausible. I still don't see it.

Those explanations are bizarre and whacky.

https://www.google.com/search?q=hag.....69i57j0l9.2440j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[excreationist]

What? I can't follow your logic

See the video in post #389 to see why they'd change the 130+ numbers into 30+.

They did sums on wax tablets, or in sand or in ash dust on black tables. Cuneiform clay tablets started out as a kind of receipt and purchase contracts. You did your sums first somewhere else and then afterwards committed them to clay for posterity.

Ok thanks for the info.

Is this really the simplest explanation using Occam's razor you can come up with? What's the point of shoehorning modern science into a work of poetic myth written by people who weren't too careful about the details? Isn't it a better explanation that the authors of the Old Testament did what authors usually do? They didn't see themselves as historiographers. They saw themselves as hagiographers. The point was to convince other people of the greatness of their God. Not to write the actual truth.

This thread is about how YEC can seem plausible. I still don't see it.

YECs who read that link would feel somewhat secure that the Bible could be true about the long ages. Also being a chemistry PhD and chess champion shows that he is intelligent.

Those explanations are bizarre and whacky.

It looks scientific to me.... even if technically it isn't.