Announcement

Collapse

Applied Protology 201 Guidelines

This forum is for Christian creationists (YEC and OEC) only, and we ask that conversations be kept civil and with brotherly charity.

Deistic notions or even theistic evolutionary* notions are excluded from this forum.

This area is not to be used to bash organizations that promote a Cosmological view different from your own (ie AiG or RTB).


The purpose of this area is to provide a safe haven for fellow creationists to discuss their differences away from the hostility that normally accompanies such discussion. While disagreements are inevitable, the purpose of this forum is for fellow believers to discuss their differences in a civil manner. If you are unable to discuss differences in Cosmogony in a civil manner, then this forum is NOT for you!!!!!

There have been some issues as to who is allowed to post in this area and who is not. TheologyWeb had very specific goals and ideas in mind when setting up this area, and this is an attempt to clarify. This forum is for creationists only. This is not simply naturalism plus a belief in God or gods. So in other words, the question that a poster must ask himself is this: In what significant ways do my views on the origin of life and the universe differ from a non-theistic materialistic view practically speaking? If there are no significant differences, then this forum is not for you. The purpose is for persons who believe in a very active and significant “creation” process. All theists will by definition have some metaphysical elements, that is not the deciding factor here. Also simply a belief in the supernatural special creation of man or the infusion of a specially created soul is not the deciding factor. Of course those things are important, but that is not the sum and substance of the types of discussions here in which this would be a significant difference in the debate discussions.


Fairly speaking, we at TheologyWeb ask the posters not to look for “loopholes” or ways that their views could “fit.” If a poster frankly would not be considered a “creationist” in general vernacular, then we ask that such do not participate in this section in good faith. This is not done as a judgment or criticism against any theist whose views do not fall within the purview of this forum, it is simply to insure that the goals and intent of the spirit of the intentions of TheologyWeb are carried out. This is not said in maliciousness at all, and we totally ask for the respect of our members to the spirit in which this forum was created, for creationists (and ID advocates) as generally understood. There may certainly be Christians who do not qualify for this forum and that is not meant as a slur or insinuation against them. Salvation is not dependent upon our creation beliefs which are a secondary, in-house issue, though of course important.

Do not be offended or combative if a Moderator contacts you with a request for clarification of your beliefs and that sometimes the judgment calls of what is within the guidelines here can be gray. Please grant us the benefit of the doubt.

Due to the rash of recent "hostile" threads, the Cosmogony forum guidelines have been updated in an effort to 1) Clarify the purpose of this forum and 2) to prevent a repeat of the recent unpleasantries.


The purpose of the Cosmogony area has always been to provide a “safe haven” for civil discourse between fellow believers who happen to have opposing views on creation. It was our intent that the common ground of belief in deity and belief in some type of special creation would be enough to keep the discussion civil.

However, just the opposite has occurred. The Cosmogony area is one of the most contentious areas of TWeb. In order to return this area to “safe haven” it was designed to be, the area will be placed under greater moderator scrutiny until you guys lean to behave.

This means that personal attacks on posters, attacks on the Christianity of supporters of views that you do not hold, attacks on Christian organizations that support views that you do not hold, and hostile behavior in general will be subject to moderator intervention. However, what constitutes an “attack” is still up to the discretion of the moderators.

Posters who are habitually edited for hostile/aggressive post will have their access to this forum removed.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact the moderator(s) of this area.



Like everywhere else at Tweb, the regular rules apply:


Forum Rules: Here

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

*Theistic evolution is a position somewhere between evolution and creationism. It says that God created the substance of our universe and the guided it into what we have today via the evolutionary process.
See more
See less

The Ham/Nye debate!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Ham/Nye debate!

    I'm surprised not to see a thread on this; even Facebook was reminding me that it was "trending" among my friends. Yesterday, Bill Nye "the Science Guy" debated Ken Ham at the Creation Museum. I didn't watch the debate, but Al Mohler's wrap-up on it summarizes what I would have expected to have happened: http://www.albertmohler.com/2014/02/...am-nye-debate/

  • #2
    You missed this one.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • #3
      The most lasting image in the public's view so far seems to be the respective answers to the "What would make you change your mind?" question, with Nye answering "evidence" and Ham answering "nothing". 1 Corinthians 15:14 makes clear that even the resurrection is, in theory, falsifiable (I don't think it really can be falsified, obviously, since it really happened, but you get my point). Since Paul will even admit that, what does it say that Ham puts a non-essential belief up as non-falsifiable? This answer is rightly being mocked as foolish, and is not a good representation of Christianity as intellectually viable.
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #4
        Okay, I haven't watched the thing but if the whole debate boils down to what theorhetically would change their minds they both wasted their time. The merits of a debate should be in its meat - the points/counterpoints and evidence referenced. Sounds like a poor moderator, just based on the tiny bit here.

        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

        My Personal Blog

        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          You missed this one.
          Ah. I don't visit that forum.

          Comment


          • #6
            I would have intentionally missed that debate. But missed it instead by default. Am also ignoring "accounts of."
            Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

            Comment


            • #7
              The debaters really needed to be given a period where they were allowed to directly ask questions of the other debater. The were a number of questions that both of them asked the other, but neither were given the opportunity to answer them.
              "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                I would have intentionally missed that debate. But missed it instead by default. Am also ignoring "accounts of."
                Alrighty then! Thanks for contributing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
                  The debaters really needed to be given a period where they were allowed to directly ask questions of the other debater. The were a number of questions that both of them asked the other, but neither were given the opportunity to answer them.
                  I agree; lack of actual debate is a failing in many modern "debates" which are really just traded prepared speeches. But speakers know that their prepared remarks will generally be more eloquent than their extemporaneous ones, so everybody sticks carefully to scripts.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yeah, even a lot of my YEC friends thought this debate was a joke... I watched it yesterday on YT. Much more convenient when you need to hammer notes and/or take a leak.

                    My biggest problem with Ham was the fact that- like KG said- he said nothing would change his mind about the Age of the Earth and the Origin of Species. Another one to tack on is the fact that he kept citing scripture to back up his point (especially since Nye- and probably a chunk of the audience- obviously doesn't adhere to Scripture as an Authority), instead of providing scientific evidence to show the tenability of his model (which is, you know, kind of the point of the debate and something that Nye holds as authoritative). I do have to give him credit, though, for pointing out some legitimate scientists who are also YEC, yet have made contributions to the scientific community (which, IIRC, was something that Bill was trying to say isn't possible).

                    Don't get me wrong... Nye had some problems of his own. For one, he came off as Chronologically snobbish with regards to the story of Noah. Another problem is that he seemed incredibly naive about how science and scientists can function (they're not immune to internal/external politics and 'going where the grants are'). I was also just about ready to slap him through the computer monitor when he used the 'Telephone' game with regards to the authority of scripture (very unscientific of him, to say the least).

                    All in all... I probably should have taken a bracing shot of something before I watched it.
                    Mercenary Maxim 37: There is No 'Overkill.' There is merely 'Open Fire,' and 'I need to Reload.'

                    Chaotic Void's Recommended Advice for Trump's Opposition to Punt him from the Oval Office: Git Gud

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What led Nye to choose Ham (if that's the case) to have this debate with? Is there any background info that placed these two together.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Didn't watch it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What led Nye to choose Ham (if that's the case) to have this debate with? Is there any background info that placed these two together.
                          They're two very popular figureheads at what they do. Ham for YEC and Nye for popular science (especially since he was shown extensively in the classrooms I attended).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I dunno about Ham but Nye is a washed up has-been trying to jump start his long dead career. I guess he saw how popular Dawkins got and wanted a sweet piece of the rabidtheist pie.
                            "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                            There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Apparently Nye is on Dancing With The Stars too.
                              "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X