How old is the Earth?

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
If I managed to create a perfect genetic replica of an adult human being, and planted a lifetime of memories into this person, I am falsifying, deceiving.

A universe with a false history is analogous to a human being with false memories. The universe can be observed, a record of its past painted across the stars in the sky--what is being suggested here is that this record is false, they are effectively false memories of events which have never taken place in the cosmos. Further, apparently God is the one who has implanted these false memories into the universe, apparently to trick us into believing the universe is much older than it really is, and of events happening in the universe's history that never happened.

At best that's some of the worst theology ever, at worst it's vile blasphemy.

-CryptoLutheran
My thoughts exactly.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
A universe with a false history is analogous to a human being with false memories. The universe can be observed, a record of its past painted across the stars in the sky--what is being suggested here is that this record is false, they are effectively false memories of events which have never taken place in the cosmos. Further, apparently God is the one who has implanted these false memories into the universe, apparently to trick us into believing the universe is much older than it really is, and of events happening in the universe's history that never happened.

At best that's some of the worst theology ever, at worst it's vile blasphemy.-CryptoLutheran

Hardly. It actually documented that when God steps in, a scientist ( an alert, observant, keen minded person
who tests things and draws conclusions) will draw the wrong conclusion.

"Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink;
but you have saved the best till now."


So you see, the scientist got the motivations wrong, the events wrong, and the source of the wine wrong.
Scientists get stuff wrong. It's not their fault.

Here is another female clinicians view:
"But Martha, the dead man's sister, protested, "Lord, he has been dead for four days.
The smell will be terrible.
"[/URL]

Yet some see the Truth
John 9:17 Finally they turned again to the blind man, "What have you to say about him?
It was your eyes he opened." The man replied, "He is a prophet."
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If this is regarding distant starlight in particular, Hartnett and Humphreys don't posit false memories, such as "light in transit". Rather, old and distant stars really are that old and distant. What's happened is that time has passed at different rates at different times and locations during the creation.

All time is really is, is a way to measure death.
And death didn't enter the world until Adam's
fall. So Adam would not have died. So time
did not start until the Fall. So Creation happened
in God's time, not ours.

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man,
and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned--


We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea.
 
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Hardly. It actually documented that when God steps in, a scientist ( an alert, observant, keen minded person
who tests things and draws conclusions) will draw the wrong conclusion.

"Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink;
but you have saved the best till now."


So you see, the scientist got the motivations wrong, the events wrong, and the source of the wine wrong.
That was no scientist. In the world of science if something like that happens the scientist will notice the anomaly and study it more intently.

Scientists get stuff wrong. It's not their fault.
Of course, everyone does, but that is hardly a meaningful critique of science.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The earth is billions of years old. All geologists at the University Of Houston agree.

If they were wrong Exxon and BP wouldn't hire them to find oil.


It only takes about a week to turn biomass into crude oil.
And I'm sure they don't agree on the source of oil
because there are many differing theories.
And nobody needs to know how old the earth is
to be a geologist. Some YEC's have masters in Geology.
It's not a learned profession.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes they agree I took geology at The University Of Houston. The earth is old and everyone agrees.
You speak of topics on which you are ill informed.

I never mentioned the earth to avoid doing what you just did.
 
Upvote 0

Rubiks

proud libtard
Aug 14, 2012
4,293
2,259
United States
✟137,866.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Honestly YEC makes me embarrassed to be a Christian. Yeah, i understand the six day creation at all, but nowhere in the Bible does it even hint at the age of the universe. I willing to consider YEC if we can find a reconciliation of bible and science that's better than "all this science stuff is all wrong" If these sciences are wrong, who knows what else could possibly be wrong. I just find it extremely difficult to accept the idea of a young earth. OEC doesn't have any direct conflict with scripture IMO, but it does conflict with interpretations of scripture. I think a decent case against biological evolution can be made, however.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
i think the ID is the way to go.. people without a theological axe to grind might be able to contribute to try and establish some truth.

I've never met anyone like that.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
Rubik:>>Honestly YEC makes me embarrassed to be a Christian. Yeah, i understand the six day creation at all, but nowhere in the Bible does it even hint at the age of the universe.

Dear Rubik, Genesis 1:6-8 shows that the first heaven was made the 2nd Day. Genesis 2:4 shows that other heavenS (Plural) were made at the beginning of the 3rd Day, the same Day the first earth was made. Genesis 1:9-10

This shows that the beginning of our Cosmos was on the 3rd Day. Since today is the 6th Day, that means that the Big Bang of our world was 3 of God's Days ago. When you divide 3 into 13.7 Billion, it shows that each of God's Days or Ages are some 4.5 Billion years in length.

I am the youngest of the young earthers since I believe that the morning of the creation was not quite 6 Days ago.

In Love,
Aman
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
When you divide 3 into 13.7 Billion, it shows that each of God's Days or Ages are some 4.5 Billion years in length.
Adding your imagination to scripture?

But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.




I am the youngest of the young earthers since I believe that the morning of the creation was not quite 6 Days ago.

In Love,
Aman

And then God will finally rest on the 7th day after you give permission.

New Living Translation (©2007)
On the seventh day God had finished his work of creation, so he rested from all his work.
(Work on this revision began in 1989 with ninety translators and published in 1996.)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
56
NY
✟16,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
You seem to be confirming his imagination rather than contradicting it. They didn't have the words million or billion back then, but if they did they probably would have used those words instead. The word million was not invented until the 14th century: more word origins 6.

And then God will finally rest on the 7th day after you give permission.
So what is your time-line then, since you claim that you are not a YEC but never seem to argue with them, but rather with everyone else?

New Living Translation (©2007)
On the seventh day God had finished his work of creation, so he rested from all his work.
(Work on this revision began in 1989 with ninety translators and published in 1996.)
My favorite versions are the Amplified Bible (liberal) and Young's Literal Translation (conservative). Both do the best job of capturing all the subtle nuances of the original language, I think. But the Amplified Bible especially can make for somewhat combersome reading, or least not poetic and flowing because it is full of parenthetical phrases. The YLT on the other hand can be too strict about using a one word-too-one word translation, which can make the meaning rather obtuse. So when I am posting a verse where I don't like either of the two translations my default is to go with the NIV.








.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
Originally Posted by Aman777
When you divide 3 into 13.7 Billion, it shows that each of God's Days or Ages are some 4.5 Billion years in length.
Sky:>>Adding your imagination to scripture?

Dear Sky, No. I accept the fact that it takes light traveling at 186k miles per second, some 13.7 Billion years to reach our earth from the most distant stars. Some people make up stories about the earth being only 6k years old and thus are all their lives confused and unable to accept God's Truth.

Sky:>>But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

God lives in the Eternal Present, but can see the end from the beginning. This verse is telling us that man's time is not God's time.





Originally Posted by Aman777
I am the youngest of the young earthers since I believe that the morning of the creation was not quite 6 Days ago.

Sky:>>And then God will finally rest on the 7th day after you give permission.

I am but a man. I have no control over God but I know that without the agreement of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit NO sinner can be created in God's Image or in Christ. God continues to create new Christians in Christ today, which means that we STILL live today at Genesis 1:27. God will NOT rest from ALL of His work of creating until the last sinner who is a part of the host of heaven, is in heaven. Genesis 2:1-3

Can you explain HOW God could have rested from ALL of His creating in the past? or should we just ignore the word ALL since it is so small?

In Love,
Aman

 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
Dear His, I watched the entire tape and here are my conclusions.

1. Malcome, the YEC hinges his whole belief of the length of the creation days on the idea that they are exactly as plainly read and can only be understood to be 24 hours in length. I don't agree since unbelievers cannot understand Scripture. Only by digging deep into God's Holy Word can one truly understand Scripture and this MUST be by the leading of the Holy Spirit. This also goes against the following Scriptures;

1Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

Pro 25:2 [It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.

Conclusion: One cannot read the story of the creation and understand it without studying it beyond a plain reading.

The YEC also believes that light changes speed, in violation of the Truth. He also seems to believe there is one Truth for Science and another for Scripture. This is impossible since there is but ONE Truth.

Hugh Ross, the OEC also makes mistakes. The most glaring one is that he does not believe Scripture which tells us the Ark was 15 cubits above the highest mountains. This shows that he is NOT a true Bible believer, if it seems to conflict with his scientific understanding.

Both participants need to study Scripture a little deeper, IMHO.

In Love,
Aman
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟11,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Hugh Ross, the OEC also makes mistakes. The most glaring one is that he does not believe Scripture which tells us the Ark was 15 cubits above the highest mountains. This shows that he is NOT a true Bible believer, if it seems to conflict with his scientific understanding.

In Love,
Aman

i agree with hugh ross, except that i don't accept the the entire bible is the word of god, but hugh is trying to fit in the bible with the evidence. the flood is the weak point in hugh's belief system.
i don't go along with YECs at all.. well not much anyway.

i think that if evolution can be proved to be true, then it really casts doubt on the existance of god, because why would god need to mess about with evolution.... it is like then special pleading for the existance of god.

i don't believe in evolution, as genes shutting down is not the making of new information. there are lots of examples that refute darwinism, but it looks like there were hominids around at the same time as homo sapiens, like nearndethals and homo erectus, and like hugh ross thinks, they were a separate species to homo sapiens. i think these hominids all lived at the same time.. and for whatever reason, they were created, and did not interbreed... that's what i think at the moment.

i think that mutations do not result in new information, and it is the case of certains genes shutting down, that causes adaptations. if there was evolution, there would need to be another mechanism, rather than mutation.

i am not a true bible believer. i admit it.

perhaps god created the hominids just to confuse everyone. nice one god, and thanks for making it harder to believe in you.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

verysincere

Exegete/Linguist
Jan 18, 2012
2,461
87
Haiti
✟18,146.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hugh Ross, the OEC also makes mistakes. The most glaring one is that he does not believe Scripture which tells us the Ark was 15 cubits above the highest mountains. This shows that he is NOT a true Bible believer, if it seems to conflict with his scientific understanding.

Both participants need to study Scripture a little deeper, IMHO.

Rubbish. There is so much that is clueless in your posts that I scarcely know where to start:

1) The Hebrew text for the "15 cubits above the highest mountain" is difficult. Many of us translate it as if there were a comma present: "the flood waters were 15 cubits high, even above the highest hill".

2) You see, the Hebrew word can be translated as either "hill" or "mountain". In other words, it has a wider semantic domain than does "mountain" in English.

3) Moreover, superlatives in any language should be compared to whatever the author intended. Does the Genesis text mean "highest in that ERETZ ["land"]" or "highest on the planet earth"? There are MANY Bible contexts where superlatives are NOT to be taken to the extreme---such as when Jesus referred to the mustard seed being "the smallest of all seeds", which would be false statement even for that area of Palestine (if one demands absolute terms, which is idiotic to do.)

4) To say that Dr. Ross (with whom I often disagree) is not a "true Christian" just because he doesn't agree with a particular treatment of the grammar of the highest mountain text in Genesis IS CONTRARY TO THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS. (You really need to review the meaning of the Gospel as defined by Jesus.)

I'm always amazed when modern day Pharisees like you deny the plain teachings of Jesus to redefine the meaning of the Gospel and create new hurdles for Christ-followers to jump. Rubbish!
 
Upvote 0