JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
Two! Four! Six! Eight! JaySecrets Prevaricates!
- Thread starter RobDownSouth
- Start date
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
You conveniently leave out the last two verses of the passage then say it was never answered. That's why I cited the entire passage. But I will cite the whole passage again just for you.
Matthew 19:16–30 (LEB): 16 And behold, someone came up to him and* said, “Teacher, what good thing must I do so that I will have eternal life?” 17 And he said to him, “Why are you asking me about what is good? There is one who is good. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments!” 18 He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “Do not commit murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, 19 honor your* father and your* mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.” 20 The young man said to him, “All these I have observed. What do I still lack?” 21 Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give the proceeds* to the poor—and you will have treasure in heaven—and come, follow me.” 22 But when* the young man heard the statement, he went away sorrowful, because he was one who had many possessions.
23 And Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I say to you that with difficulty a rich person will enter into the kingdom of heaven! 24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich person into the kingdom of God.” 25 So when* the disciples heard this,* they were extremely amazed, saying, “Then who can be saved?” 26 But Jesus looked at them* and* said to them, “With human beings this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” 27 Then Peter answered and* said to him, “Behold, we have left everything and followed you. What then will there be for us?” 28 And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you that in the renewal of the world, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me—you also will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields on account of my name will receive a hundred times as much, and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who are first will be last, and the last first.
In other words, you are as usual, lifting words out of context, twisting them to say what they clearly don't say, putting your own demands on words you twisted, demands you would not put on any other text, then demanding others answer your fictional ideas about what the text should say. It's dishonest and poor study, not to mention revealing your inability to read and treat a text you disagree with honestly.
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
Again riches aren't the issue. The full passage makes that clear. The issue is a dependency on riches instead of God and a clinging to them as your god. By that definition, as clarified when Scripture says, "The LOVE of money [note, not money itself] is the root of all evil." If I have only ten dollars to my name, but cling to that greedily, chase after more money as my primary goal, and put that money before God, I fit that eye of a needle status. If I have millions, and I submit that money to God to be used according to His will, and put God first, I fit that "with God" status.
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
https://www.newyorkapologetics.com/evolution-hoaxes/
A short list of your "proven science" in the fossil record.
https://creation.com/fraud-rediscovered
Or how about that?
Or maybe this:
https://answersingenesis.org/human-body/vestigial-organs/vestigial-organs-evidence-for-evolution/
Your probable science is built on provable hoaxes, lies, and ignorance.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 26,354
Not what Jesus said. Again, I ask that you please read the Bible before trying to quote it.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 26,354
That’s a tough sell since we know the Bible says the Earth is flat and that the Earth is 6,000 years old and also 4.5 billion years old. Meanwhile the science has not been refuted.
ll74
Your Best Friend
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Posts
- 48,429
What science do you use to prove that the Earth is 10,000 years old?
LoneMilf
Brutally Honest
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2023
- Posts
- 408
I've had a look at several of the sites and articles you refer to. They are really not scientific though.
Most of it is based on the flawed idea that the Great Flood was an actual phenomenon that covered the whole earth. Then that is used in an attempt to invalidate actual scientific findings.
This makes no sense from any scientific point of view and it makes pretty much all the other conclusions from those sites highly suspect.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 26,354
Especially since we know the great flood never happened.
GhostFence2024
Experienced
- Joined
- May 21, 2024
- Posts
- 70
Can Thanos just fingersnap Alabama away please? Fuckin ay.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 26,354
He can snap away half. Thanos is actually more merciful than God.
GhostFence2024
Experienced
- Joined
- May 21, 2024
- Posts
- 70
It probably happened about 2.5 to 4 billion years ago as most of or all of the planet was underwater back then. Toss in that question "were Adam and Eve around 2.5 bya?" like a handgrenade and watch the chaos ensue.
GhostFence2024
Experienced
- Joined
- May 21, 2024
- Posts
- 70
I say snap it all away, from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
I kid of course. Snap away the right wingers. That should be about half, right?
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 26,354
Don’t think Thanos was political.
not even worth the paper it's written on.
Starts off wrong, and gets worse. Boy Evolution sure is a problem for you creationist....Fossils don't mean Evolution...Fossils are records, I quit reading at that point.
Ok this one starts off pretty good and I agree with most of it. But when they say DNA breaks down rather rapidily, they have now distorted the truth. Yes in soft tissue DNA does rapidly breakdown, but not in bone. Teeth being exceptional good at storing DNA. So One paragraph then the lies and distortion of truth begin.
"
There is a good deal of valid information,but the twist is cute, "human". Well Homo Sapiens are "human" since we decided to call ourselves that. However we are a different linage, and the DNA is not the same. So sure they are Human, I have no issue with that, they're just not Homo Sapiens. We are...
So no answers to my question as to why God wiped them out ( plus you completely missed the Densiovians)?
lol.
I can measure the current in a series circuit, and you in another place can do the same,and have the same results. That is Science and it's repeatable, which is the proof. ( what sucks is, your Creationist" buddies can do the same, then they spend every effort they can to find a different result, that guess what? Only other Creationists find....
We can shoot atoms at each other, and break them down,currently to the Higgs Boson (AKA "the God particle). That is repeatable. That's what makes it Science. Anyone can follow the process and achieve the same result.
Show me one thing in the bible that is repeatable. Just one.
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/six-evidences-of-young-earth/
Here's a few examples for starters.
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
They are incredibly scientific, and heavily referenced in most cases. The problem is you don't LIKE the evidence brought forth, so you say they aren't scientific.
If by scientific you mean the Smithsonian wouldn't approve, or other such bodies, you have relegated science to a group that thinks a certain way... and that has banned papers for peer review from people who bring evidence to the contrary.
A worldwide flood is quite easy to prove, from the fossil layers, to the location of certain fossils where they have no business being, to trees upsidedown through multiple layers supposedly millions of years apart, as part of those layers, in various stages of fossilization consistent with the layers, to the fact that the layers bend and fold the way you would expect with the Flood. There is more evidence for the worldwide flood than almost any event in history.
No. You begin with assumptions and presuppositions, and those presuppositions make conclusions suspect to you.
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
Read my above post. Not going to repeat myself here.
No one said fossils are evolution. They said they are records that are twisted by evolutionists. The layer proves the age of the fossil, but the fossil proves the age of the layer? That's the evolutionary geologists' argument. And it is flawed on its face
Not over millions or billions of years it doesn't store soft tissue and DNA. This is why many paleontologists have questioned the ages evolution claims... And have been silenced by the scientific establishment when they did. Thankfully places like ICR and Answers in Genesis exist so they can get their story out
Again, they were fully human. It might be a ethnicity or people group of humans who died off or got wiped out... Or just intermarried into the others around them until they simply ceased to be the dominant genetic source. But they were fully human.
They, like all the other humans on earth other than Noah and his family, after being warned for a very long time, died in the flood, yes, if they were pre-flood. Give me a bit to research the Densiovians.
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
Okay. Now I know why this one wasn't as familiar. As it is newer information, and even many evolutionary scientists don't know what to make of it, I am holding my judgement. But I will give you a very good answer from scientists who have done the research.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-...JC6-i2Svje4q52RdPB__CqivfBcQUAwhoCzb4QAvD_BwE
JaySecrets
Poet Rockstar
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2024
- Posts
- 1,884
None of this is proof for evolution in any form, or proof against Creation. All it shows is the God created a pretty awesome place.
So here's a few places that will give you several facts in the Bible, scientific facts, that not only are measurable and repeatable, but we use them today from science to medicine to agriculture...
https://carta.fiu.edu/gsc-creative/2016/04/12/3-scientific-facts-you-never-knew-were-in-the-bible/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ch...ble-that-prove-faith-and-science-coexist/amp/
https://www.icr.org/article/modern-scientific-discoveries-verify-scriptures
https://truthfortheworld.org/science-proves-the-bible
I could go on... But you won't even bother considering these.
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2003
- Posts
- 26,354
Nothing you’ve posted is scientific. One of the links you posted just says “assume the population doubles every 150 years”. That’s not what science is. Science is evidence and fact checking and your peers repeating your work to see if they get the same results.
Do you have any peer reviewed scientific literature to back any of this up?
LoneMilf
Brutally Honest
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2023
- Posts
- 408
We clearly don't have the same definition of what science is.
However, I want to thank you for providing the links and trying to explain your reasoning. At least it gives me a chance to understand why you see the world the way you do. It is a good example of how much we are affected by the environment we grow up in.
I got a little curious about how many people might be sharing your view, and I was shocked to see that it seems to be just about 40% of all Americans!
https://news.gallup.com/poll/261680/americans-believe-creationism.aspx
But you have and do , over and over.
That is exactly what they said. BTW Geologist are the ones who age the rock, Archaeologists work with the fossil records. Neither are "evolutionists, they are scientists. Who must be in "cahoots" according to you.
Bones like teeth are not soft tissue, and so far those types of bones have recovered DNA as far back as 2.2 Million years. There is no Dino DNA, since those records are made up of Rock.
Many do debate the age, not all are trying to prove the earth is only 10,000 years old.
The scientific community doesn't silence anyone, otherwise, how would the papers you refer to exist? What the science community does is publish those "papers", and then the community tries to recreate the finds. If they can't or the data is flawed,then that is exposed. You can create a battery, it is provable and repeatable. You can make your own DNA samples if you had the equipment training and chemicals, it's not really that hard. Reading the sequence though might be a problem.
You can show the earth has a magnetic field, that is science, it is repeatable and provable...none of the shit you tend to post can be repeated unless you fudge the results.
That is what science is about. It is not about proving one belief or another, but following the results and examining what it means.
Yes, because those mean old evolutionists are out to get them....
The DNA says otherwise.
NO the DNA says otherwise.
Yes all three did inter breed, the DNA records of the surviving Homo Sapiens shows this.
Human is a layman's term, so sure you can call them "human", you can call them "Bob" too, that is about as relevant.
They live of the land, mostly housed in existing natural locations, and hunted with spears. How did they piss off God?
Take all the time you want.
Yes, I'm sure you will, and I'll hazard a guess it will be pretty much along the same lines as the rest of what you have presented.
Similar threads
