This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Mayim Bialik (Big Bang Theory) weighs in on Genesis creation account

#1the_hedonistPosted 6/12/2013 10:02:22 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=4aT9RHmhngk
---
"Why should I gain from His reward? I cannot give an answer.
But this I know with all my heart - His wounds have paid my ransom."
#2GBALoserPosted 6/12/2013 10:17:07 AM
Minus the lack of Blossom pontificating, don't disagree with the video a bit.
---
Every once in a while I realize the human race may be worth saving. Of course, then I come back here, but still, those are good moments. -Readyman
#3FlashOfLightPosted 6/12/2013 1:37:25 PM(edited)
Ok, watched the whole video.

This constant appeal to "the days in Genesis were not literal 24 hour periods" in order to try to cuddle the Big Bang Theory in its arms, is a repetitive and easily debunked approach to try harmonize the two separate beliefs.

People never follow up on it because they can't think critically; so if a "day" is not a 24 hour period, then what is it? a 2.7 billion year period? or perhaps the first day is 800 micro seconds, the next day is 10,000 years, and the third is 4 million, followed by what? succeeding incrementations of hundreds of millions of years, and billions?

And how does this have communion with the Biblical account still contradicting when plants first appeared as opposed to the current scientific model?

The two beliefs are opposed to each other, period, they can not be reconciled together.
---
The internet - Tell THEM everything ;)
#4OrangeWizardPosted 6/12/2013 5:03:57 PM
From: FlashOfLight | #003
This constant appeal to "the days in Genesis were not literal 24 hour periods" in order to try to cuddle the Big Bang Theory in its arms, is a repetitive and easily debunked approach



Can you easily debunk it then?

o if a "day" is not a 24 hour period, then what is it?


Nobody knows. What is this, an appeal to ignorance?

And how does this have communion with the Biblical account still contradicting when plants first appeared as opposed to the current scientific model?


How does it contradict science on when plants first appeared?
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive
#5bratt100Posted 6/12/2013 5:14:03 PM
Actually you need to prove your side first. That's how this works. You make a crazy claim and then back it up, if you can't it isn't worth looking at when we have evidence to say otherwise.

We know roughly how old the earth is and we have a pretty good idea of when life first either came to be or was transported here. You have a book that says it all happened in 7 days and some people jump through as many hoops as possible in hopes that they won't get stuck just to justify their insane ramblings.

Earth is billions of years old and as far as we can tell bacteria was one of the first forms of life on earth. If we learn more we well adapt and change what we got wrong the first time. That is how people learn.
---
"If the victim was a mute, then she shouldn't really be out alone."- OrangeWizard on rape
#6Polish_CrusaderPosted 6/12/2013 5:15:04 PM
I dont have to justify why i belief gods creation in opposition to evolutionary theory. Gods miraculous works are enough for me.

If you are driving in a car at highway speed and stick your hand out the window do you feel something? Yes ofcourse, it feels like a solid object in your hand. But you cant see it. So how do you know anything is there? Its because what you feel is the wind. I know the wind is real even though i cant see it. Put 2 and 2 together.

Christians really need to stop attempting to be all scientific and trying to sound cool. This is not the science board. Gods word and miracles are enough for me and they should be enough for you. Science by pracitce is mans explanation of the universe. Creation is gods explanation. There is an inherent conflict of interest there. Stop trying to sound cool, folks. Just search for the truth of God, accept it, and move on.
#7Hustle KongPosted 6/12/2013 5:16:08 PM
Actually you need to prove your side first. That's how this works. You make a crazy claim and then back it up,


What claims did OW make?
---
Shooting Game never die.
It prays that the clover of luck be always in your mind.
#8OrangeWizardPosted 6/12/2013 5:24:10 PM(edited)
From: bratt100 | #005
Actually you need to prove your side first.


Who are you talking to? What side is that?
---
Trolling and making valid arguments are not mutually exclusive
#9bratt100Posted 6/12/2013 5:34:47 PM
OrangeWizard posted...
From: bratt100 | #005
Actually you need to prove your side first.


Who are you talking to? What side is that?


You know what, your right. I assumed your position based on your response. This was wrong of me. Sorry.
---
"If the victim was a mute, then she shouldn't really be out alone."- OrangeWizard on rape
#10bratt100Posted 6/12/2013 5:38:48 PM
Polish_Crusader posted...
I dont have to justify why i belief gods creation in opposition to evolutionary theory. Gods miraculous works are enough for me.

If you are driving in a car at highway speed and stick your hand out the window do you feel something? Yes ofcourse, it feels like a solid object in your hand. But you cant see it. So how do you know anything is there? Its because what you feel is the wind. I know the wind is real even though i cant see it. Put 2 and 2 together.

Christians really need to stop attempting to be all scientific and trying to sound cool. This is not the science board. Gods word and miracles are enough for me and they should be enough for you. Science by pracitce is mans explanation of the universe. Creation is gods explanation. There is an inherent conflict of interest there. Stop trying to sound cool, folks. Just search for the truth of God, accept it, and move on.


And it doesn't bug you that "gods word" describes things that never actually happened in any literal way.
---
"If the victim was a mute, then she shouldn't really be out alone."- OrangeWizard on rape