(SWGO)SirPepsi wrote:(SWGO)DesertEagle wrote:Pepsi, you keep saying Omnipotence and omniscience etc are contradictory, but you are not explaining how.
I just gave you a logically coherent argument, and you are rebutting it by saying its wrong. Explain how I am wrong (i.e. point out the flaw in my logic). Explain how you can be omnipotent but not omniscient.
No, you didn't - you listed the traits and told me they were compatible with one another, you said they are dependent on each other. I disagree, if God is immortal, he cannot die. If God is omnipotent, he should be able to do everything humans can do and more, including committing suicide. If he can't commit suicide, he is not omnipotent (all-powerful), and if he can, he is not immortal. If God is omniscient, he knows all. There are several verses in the Bible talking about God's "surprise," if he can be surprised (have that emotion), then he is not omniscient.
And you just gave one possible alternative for why languages can be traced back to only a few main tongues, but that doesn't refute my alternative interpretation.
I don't have to prove a negative. Burden of proof. You have no valid evidence.
You are stating your position but failing to refute mine, implying that they are valid alternatives. I was under the impression that you thought my position was invalid.
I don't have to prove a negative. Burden of proof. You have no valid evidence.
Easily said about evolution as well.
No, not easily said about evolution. We know that we exist (or we perceive that we exist), therefore coming up for an explanation as to how we came to exist is not the same as saying, "Radiometric dating could be flawed, and if it is, it might be caused by the flood." It is different because we know for a FACT that we and other species exist, and we don't know that radiometric dating is flawed.
Ok, since you won't do the math on the Ark, I will do it for you.
1 cubit = about 21 inches (3 feet), different versions of the cubit exist, but they are generally close to each other in length.
Ark = 300 cubits x 50 cubits = 900 feet x 150 feet = 135,000 sq ft, give or take a bit for the different sized floors.
It was 30 cubits = 90 feet high, with 3 decks, each 30 feet high.
Going off one person's calculations, there are an estimated 1.4 million cubic feet of internal space, about the capacity of 522 standard livestock cars used on a train.
It is possible to transport 240 sheep in one livestock car, so doing the math, the ark could probably hold about 125,000 sheep-sized creatures.
However, there are many creatures much smaller than a sheep (insects, mice, dogs, cats, etc), and some larger. Assuming young animals were taken (as would make sense if you want to repopulate the earth), the general size of even the dinosaurs taken would have been relatively small. Assume that averaging the sizes of the creatures gives you a sheep sized creature. Assuming 2 of each type, you could have a maximum of about 60,000 species on board.
Now, here is where evolutionists have a problem, you say there are not enough species. However, we contend that Noah only had to take 2 (or 7) of each "type," not species (it is probably closer to the level of class).
Sure, that could account for space. But the species variety we have today would make that impossible. Species didn't change or diffuse that quickly after a world-wide flood some 4 thousand years ago. We have way too many species, and you can't just say "well, we only need 7 of each 'type,'" that doesn't amount to evidence. It's like saying, well, the Sun is huge, so it could have been formed when fifty-million space mites swarmed in one place and were turned into gas and fire by an angry being whom they had offended.
So in the Creationistic framework, there is no problem with the capacity of the ark.
You can't invent evidence and apologist theories! It doesn't work - by that standard, we can "prove" anything. "My skin is light, I must have been made out of milk! See guys, it makes sense!"
Just because God can do anything doesn't mean He will. You are suggesting that He has to do everything and thus violate His own nature. As far as "surprise," that is emotion yes, but not like ours. He is ominiscient, but just because He knows everything doesn't mean He cannot allow Himself to be affected by what He knows. He is never "surprised." Show me those verses, and try again.
There is no contradiction in God's nature, you are going to extremes to force them. You are saying that because something can contradict IF DONE A CERTAIN WAY it must contradict. Try again.
I also don't need to prove a negative, so therefore I really don't need to defend Creationism against your attacks. You sir have to prove that evolution happened. Just because a Big Bang could have produced the universe doesn't mean it did. Try again.
Ok, for the sake of argument, supposed that the ark lacked the capacity to hold all of today's genetic diversity. This implies that genetic diversity (i.e. information) is increasing. Now the burden is on you to prove that genetic diversity increases over time. Show me a lab experiment where genetic diversity increased. I don't have to prove a negative, try harder.
FYI, Creationism has been around for several thousand years, while evolution has really only been around for a few hundred. You are the newcomer, so the entire burden of proof is on you. Don't try to spin this around.
Just FYI, don't ever try to debate me if you don't like your own arguments being used against you.
er of the Lenski experiments, wherein E.Coli was found to develop new genetic information after 50,000 generations were born and reproduced: 
