How old is the earth and the sun?

[Timdaniel]

Nobody is stopping you gouging out your eyes.

Except for me.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

<staff edit>

This is the science forum of Christian Forums. It's kind of expected people on here to talk about science.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Umm, I thought this was "Christianforums.com" not a science forum.

Wrong again. It's called "Physical and Life Sciences" for a reason, you know...


<staff edit>

 

[Timdaniel]

So why quote him as if he mattered



Wrong again.



So now you're saying that everything in the Bible is literal.

I am saying that things that are meant to be taken literally in the Bible, should be. There are many times when they are not meant to be taken literally, and that is completely understood.

I should explain this:

Jesus talks in parables. A parable is a story that is told to convey another message. The Song of Songs is a poem that is full of hidden meanings.

But something like Genesis, a book that is known to be history, is not something that is meant to be read as not being literal.

 

[Taom Ben Robert]

So how long was it between the time God created the Earth and he created Adam and Eve? Furthermore, how do you know that series of people was complete and accurate?

God created the universe 13.799 billion years ago, earth about 4.54 billion years ago, and a literal Adam and Eve several hundred Thousand years ago .

 

[Timdaniel]

Wrong again. It's called "Physical and Life Sciences" for a reason, you know...

<staff edit>

Here is the link at the top of my screen, perhaps I misinterpret it:

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/how-old-is-the-earth-and-the-sun.7920289/page-9

 

[katerinah1947]

In bhsmte's defense, I read the post that he was replying to and I did not understand a word of it.
Not that it went over my head. It's just that it made hardly any sense.

Hi,

Thank-you. It is almost all of bhstme's posts that follow the 'ask question but answer none', scenario, to me. I just thought I should ask at least once or more times, why he does that.

The closer I or anyone has gotten to the issue with bhstme, is the quicker and stronger, he changes the subject, but almost always ignoring every and anything that was put to him.

It is a pattern, I am curious about with him.

I will look at the post in question now.

LOVE,

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Hi,

Thank-you. It is almost all of bhstme's posts that follow the 'ask question but answer none', scenario, to me. I just thought I should ask at least once or more times, why he does that.

The closer I or anyone has gotten to the issue with bhstme, is the quicker and stronger, he changes the subject, but almost always ignoring every and anything that was put to him.

It is a pattern, I am curious about with him.

LOVE,

I don't really see it that way. The man seems to continually stay on topic, or only just altering his line of questioning to take a different approach to the topic in question, but he doesn't seem to change the subject.
The people he talks to on the other hand...

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

@Timdaniel, still waiting on a reply to my question on how science is a god.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I am saying that things that are meant to be taken literally in the Bible, should be. There are many times when they are not meant to be taken literally, and that is completely understood.

Not as completely as you'd like to think.

I should explain this:

Jesus talks in parables. A parable is a story that is told to convey another message. The Song of Songs is a poem that is full of hidden meanings.

According to Christian theology, God inspired Genesis.

According to Christian theology, Jesus is God.

Therefore, if Jesus can talk to his disciples in parables, God can talk to us in parables.

But something like Genesis, a book that is known to be history, is not something that is meant to be read as not being literal.

"Known" or assumed?

It takes more than you're saying something to make it true... just so you know...

 

[Timdaniel]

Don't worry people. Do you notice how many do not agree with what I am saying? And how many agree with the scientists without a shread of doubt? The mainstream Christian community embraces evolution. But I am from a very thin line of people that believe that the Bible says what it says is true. You can mix whatever you want with your beliefs if it helps you, but I don't see how it does. It just blurs the lines is all. I am not afraid of being alone as some of you are.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Here is the link at the top of my screen, perhaps I misinterpret it:

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/how-old-is-the-earth-and-the-sun.7920289/page-9

And did you read the part of that link that said "Physical and Life Sciences"?

Obviously you missed that part. No big deal; it could happen to anyone?

 

[brocke]

To what you are saying about "yom", I have a different understanding. This is a quote from Ken Ham's book "The New Answers Book".

"Yom is defined the first time it is used in the Bible (Genesis 1:4-5_ in its two literal senses: the light portion of the light/dark cycle and the whole light/dark cycle. Second, yom is used with "evening" and "morning". Everywhere these two words are used in the old testament, either together or seperately and with or without yom in the context, they always mean a literal evening or morning of a literal day. Third, yom is modified with a number: one day, second day, third day, etc. which everywhere else in the Old Testament indicates literal days. Fourth, yom is deined literally in Genesis 1:14 in relation to the heavenly bodies."

Ken Harm is not a Biblical Scholar nor an expert in the Hebrew language used in the Old Testament books. He doesn't know what he is talking about.

Gleason L. Archer,Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, pages 60-61, Baker 1982:
“ There were six major stages in this work of formation, and these stages are represented by successive days
of a week. In this connection it is important to observe that none of the six creative days bears a definite
article in the Hebrew text; the translations “the first day,” “the second day,” etc., are in error. The Hebrew
says, “And the evening took place, and the morning took place, day one” (1:5). Hebrew expresses “the first
day” by hayyom harison, but this text says simply yom ehad (day one). Again, in v.8 we read not hayyom
hasseni (“the second day”) but yom seni (“a second day”). In Hebrew prose of this genre, the definite
article was generally used where the noun was intended to be definite; only in poetic style could it be
omitted. The same is true with the rest of the six days; they all lack the definite article. Thus they are well
adapted to a sequential pattern, rather than to strictly delimited units of time.” (emphasis added)

 

[TLK Valentine]

Don't worry people. Do you notice how many do not agree with what I am saying? And how many agree with the scientists without a shread of doubt?

"Without a shred of doubt"? Missed that part.

The mainstream Christian community embraces evolution.

Why shouldn't they? Even if they're wrong, it's not a salvation issue.

But I am from a very thin line of people that believe that the Bible says what it says is true.

Whatever makes you feel special...

You can mix whatever you want with your beliefs if it helps you, but I don't see how it does. It just blurs the lines is all. I am not afraid of being alone as some of you are.

Then why are you here if not to try to get us to agree?

 

[Timdaniel]

Ken Harm is not a Biblical Scholar nor an expert in the Hebrew language used in the Old Testament books. He doesn't know what he is talking about.

Gleason L. Archer,Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, pages 60-61, Baker 1982:
“ There were six major stages in this work of formation, and these stages are represented by successive days
of a week. In this connection it is important to observe that none of the six creative days bears a definite
article in the Hebrew text; the translations “the first day,” “the second day,” etc., are in error. The Hebrew
says, “And the evening took place, and the morning took place, day one” (1:5). Hebrew expresses “the first
day” by hayyom harison, but this text says simply yom ehad (day one). Again, in v.8 we read not hayyom
hasseni (“the second day”) but yom seni (“a second day”). In Hebrew prose of this genre, the definite
article was generally used where the noun was intended to be definite; only in poetic style could it be
omitted. The same is true with the rest of the six days; they all lack the definite article. Thus they are well
adapted to a sequential pattern, rather than to strictly delimited units of time.” (emphasis added)

I think you are wrong but alright. Someone has to be wrong. But no one wants to be that person.

 

[RickG]

Umm, I thought this was "Christianforums.com" not a science forum. Also, I will say whatever I bloody well feel like saying, there will be no censoring.

I am not going to show you anything, because we are not even face to face. But if you would like to, we could meet and I could show you my car that I prayed for which is working really well.

You might try reading the forum rule Timdaniel.

From: Guidelines for all Discussion and Debate Forums

No General Apologetics Topics

Apologetics is a branch of theology that concerns itself with defending or proving the truths of the Christian faith and doctrines. Discussion and debate on subjects related to general apologetics are not allowed in the Discussion and Debate category forums. Christians who would like to discuss apologetics may do so in the Christian Apologetics forum.

Link: http://www.christianforums.com/threads/guidelines-for-all-discussion-and-debate-forums.7797817/

 

[Timdaniel]

That's one man's opinion -- but be thankful this thread doesn't include a poll...

You all can assume whatever you want. We have argued for a while. You all want to believe you are right so you can sit pretty doing nothing. <staff edit> Are you learning about Christianity?

I want you to know something: unless you believe that what the Bible says is true, you aren't a Christian. Where do they get their rules from? Where do we get anything? It is the loose ends that unravel the bible that we need to watch out for. That being said, saying that the 6 days were not literal is an unraveling of the whole structure of Christianity. It is losing all of what was in it. Once it is gone, you will not even want to fight because your minds have been "enlightened" and you will accept what the world tells you as true. Some will fight, but it will be too late.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You all can assume whatever you want. We have argued for a while. You all want to believe you are right so you can sit pretty doing nothing. <staff edit> Are you learning about Christianity?

As a matter of fact, I am.

I want you to know something: unless you believe that what the Bible says is true, you aren't a Christian.

True =/= literal. Remember the parables?

Where do they get their rules from? Where do we get anything? It is the loose ends that unravel the bible that we need to watch out for.

Why is that so important? As Christians, don't you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ?

That being said, saying that the 6 days were not literal is an unraveling of the whole structure of Christianity.

Again, that's one man's opinion.

It is losing all of what was in it.

All? I had no idea the Bible contained so little... it seemed so much bigger last time I was reading it.

Once it is gone, you will not even want to fight because your minds have been "enlightened" and you will accept what the world tells you as true. Some will fight, but it will be too late.

Fight what?

 

[bhsmte]

Hi,

Why do you ask questions and anwser none. Is it so you can have plausible deniability in all things?

LOVE,

I guess you would have to demonstrate, I answer no questions on this site.

Furthermore, if I have no clue what the poster is trying to say, it is a tad difficult to respond.

 

[katerinah1947]

I don't really see it that way. The man seems to continually stay on topic, or only just altering his line of questioning to take a different approach to the topic in question, but he doesn't seem to change the subject.
The people he talks to on the other hand...

Hi,

But I do see it that way. I can also see it your way.

To see it your way, you have to know the other person is wrong, and you are going to teach them something, with a line of questions to get there.

To see it my way, you would have to think this is not a teaching forum, with one person having all the right answers for everyone else to learn from, but a two way forum, where a person's ideas are not discarded or ignored.

Consider their discussion, if I can do this well enough.

Does the prosecutor, have to have seen the defendant commit a murder, to prove they did with evidence in court?

well, if you want to give me the court analogy, then you will have to throw out the other evidence because someone has to win. If the Bible is not the word of God, and is not inerrant, then what are you saying? that it is not true?

people are this way. they think they are right. they believe they are right. based on their assumptions of what is real and what is not. if the Bible is not true, then don't argue anything else about it, because the gospel might be just an allusion to something else. perhaps God didn't really mean this, and perhaps God didn't really mean that, is what you will have to figure out.

Do you not see the relationship between those two statements, thus making a "I do not understand answer on your part and bhstme's part confusing."?

In a court of law, I hope everyone here knows that it is a fight, with justice not winning so much as the best fighter the best boxer in the ring winning. It is not about right and wrong, in the way it is done, in America. It is who is the best fighter of the match.

You, do know that do you not?

That is what the someone has to win comment was about.
The comment about the Bible not being the word of God, is a question put to bhstme to answer. He did not do that.

The rest is commentary.

Also, did he or did he not answer my question in post 218? He did not.

LOVE,