Calminian

Yes, I'm in the midst of a couple battles now. LOL! Also at BaptistBoard. Looks like Strean's closing in on $20K. Says he thinks he can produce season 1 for $150K, which would be amazing.

Hey all. Haven't visited here in a while, but wanted to ask for your opinion on Ralph Strean's new idea for a science bible documentary series (Strean was the producer-director of the Genesis 3D movie). His new series will be a documentary that will challenge the rebooted 'Cosmos' series featuring Neil deGrasse Tyson (who succeeded Carl Sagan). Strean's show, 'Quantum' will feature Dr. Charles Jackson—a brilliant creation scientist and apologist—piloting a time-traveling spaceship (a space-time ship), teaching the true biblical history of our world. (You can view Dr. Jackson's video testimony here - highly recommended). The ship can go anywhere and anywhen, past or future. Check out the info below and let me know what you think. Here's a blog on the series: Ralph Strean’s ‘Quantum’ series takes on ‘Cosmos’ Fundraising just started. Here is the IndieGoGo page for more information.

I checked out the link, but statistics without context won't do us much good. My point was that some disparities can be caused by things that aren't racism, such as bad choices, and bad cultural elements. What statistic can you point to, in proper context, that you think point to racism as the actual cause? You can point to group A having more problems than group B, but that alone doesn't mean there is bias against group A. I could mean that group A is making bad choices. IOW's the statistic alone don't ell us either way. And furthermore, if there really isn't a bias, but group A believes there is, there really is no hope, for no one is focusing on the true enemy. The solution might be exposing racism, but if that's not the real cause, it will only contribute to the delaying of the real solution, and contribute to the problem. IOW's if you're wrong about this, you're actually hurting those you're trying to help.

Maybe you could at least explain this to me. What exactly is the evidence you're presenting for institutional racism? One of the things I fear in our country is racism being manufactured if it's not really there, so as to explain away disparities within communities. Sometimes disparities can be influenced outside causes like racism, but it can also be the result of internal causes like choices and bad cultural elements. This result then can be people seeking out racism where it doesn't really exist, and accusing people who aren't really racist. I think falsely accusing an innocent person of racism is just as evil as racism itself. Would you agree?

Just watched this with my wife and kids. What a blessing! It's a story all kids know, mainly because of some very cool cartoons that have been produced (Joseph Dreamer of Dreams, and Prince of Egypt). But we all know they'll be told later by their teachers "it never happened." There is just "no evidence for this event." Well, this documentary squashes that notion, showing evidence for the specific land the hebrews settled, evidence of their multiplication, evidence of their enslavement, evidence of their sudden departure, evidence of their conquests in Canaan, etc. It also shows the struggle going on within Judaism which is akin to what we see in the church. Many rabbis are leading the charge in claiming the Torah need not be read literally nor as actual history. Where have we heard that before. And it's very relevant to the creation debate in that it exposes the fragility of Egyptian chronology which really is the foundation of all ancient chronologies. Very professionally done. TV quality. I highly recommend it for adults and kids about 12 and up. It's a 3 part documentary, each about 40 minutes. We spread it out over 3 nights, as it's a lot of information. You can purchase it from Answers in Genesis among other places.

But how do you have interbreeding without a common ancestry? An honest question. Dogs for instance can interbreed with wolves and coyotes, but everyone knows that that's because they go back to a common ancestor. I would think the fact that neanderthal's interbreeding with humans proves this. I'm no expert though. Maybe you can enlighten me as to how else this can be.

I don't think those examples would work for the original Eden rivers though. There we have a river splitting into rivers.

YEC theory is really just the idea that God can make something fully functional instantly, like the wine at Cana. He doesn't need to wait for processes to unfold. My question really doesn't pertain to the when or how, though. I'm just trying to come up with a scenario in which a river could split into 4 headwaters. From what you're telling me, it can and does happen today. It would seem Eden only needed to be somewhat elevated and to be on or near a place with a lot of precipitation.

Does anyone have any theories about the sources of the Eden river system? It's said to have flowed from the Garden and split into 4 headwaters. Thus the Eden river must have been quite powerful and large to split into 4 smaller rivers. (normally rivers converge to make a larger river) What was feeding it? Did it have a subterranean source? Was the Garden on high ground? Did precipitation feed it or was it a combo of precipitation and subterranean sources?

Nother one bites the dust.

Generally when people refuse to engage and cite links instead, it's a surefire indicator they don't quite have a grasp on the argument themselves. It's okay to cite a link to support the arguments you make, but to cite a link instead of an argument is just a good ol' fashioned cop-out. I mean really? "My response is in the link. You have to now refute it." TD, can you imagine your reaction if a creationist attempted this tactic with you?

Yes in Biblical nomenclature insects are more like plants—like biological machines. Plants nor insects are said to be nephesh chayyah (living souls). They are not living breathing souls like animals and humans. Now a fetus may not be breathing with its own lungs initially, but it has blood, and even in its very beginning stage is being feed by the mother's blood and the oxygen within that blood. So I don't think there is ever a time when a fetus biblically is not alive. And even if you want to cling to this technicality, the biblical writers explicitly referred to fetuses as human. Speaking to a specific person God says, Is. 44:2 This is what the LORD says— he who made you, who formed you in the womb, and who will help you:.... "formed you" is a specific reference to a specific person (singular) whose beginning was in the womb. Both Jesus and John the Baptist were referred to by their names in the womb. Now you can argue that you don't think a fetus is alive in the same sense we are, but you can't say the biblical writers believed that. Very obviously they believed life (nephesh life) began at conception.

I see no reason why you can't use that word to clarify the sense of evolution you are referring to. Just thinking out loud, though, it would seem to focus people on the meaning of mutations, and perhaps hurt the theory in general. Don't creationists like to focus on the inadequacy of mutations to make more complex designs? It's kind of like a Honda Civic getting in an accident once in a while and each time becoming more like an airplane.

Did you really mean to post a Star Trek scene?? That's what the embed link brought up. www.youtube.com/embed/3B4lsvrzfZI Just wondering if there were any speculations beyond Kronosaurus.

No, and don't get me wrong, I agree. I think the historical testimonial evidence is there and very persuasive. I think also, the fossil evidence revealing mysterious sinus chambers is very interesting. But the bottom line, scripture describes a fire emitting aquatic dragon-like animal. That has to settle it for the christian. Now I'm wondering if this animal was ocean or lake dwelling, or perhaps something semi-aquatic like a Spinosaur. Got any theories or speculations on that?