Young earth Creationism.

[yeshuaslavejeff]

like little children........ the kingdom of heaven is restricted to those who become.

that's reason enough to cast off the wisdom of the scientists of the world, etc etc et al.

start with faith. start with believing. or start with seeking Yhvh in Yahushua. then don't try to add to what He says.

very simple really. just and right , simply, the whole world rebels, all society is an abomination to Yhvh, and under His Judgment.

 

[BryanW92]

like little children........ the kingdom of heaven is restricted to those who become.

that's reason enough to cast off the wisdom of the scientists of the world, etc etc et al.

start with faith. start with believing. or start with seeking Yhvh in Yahushua. then don't try to add to what He says.

very simple really. just and right , simply, the whole world rebels, all society is an abomination to Yhvh, and under His Judgment.

I like scientists. They discovered vaccines, better ways to farm, and the technologies used to make the Internet possible.

 

[Alithis]

I like scientists. They discovered vaccines, better ways to farm, and the technologies used to make the Internet possible.

yeh ..because Gods hands were tied..he cant heal ...

see? the level of unbelief,once seeded grows wildly.

 

[BryanW92]

yeh ..because Gods hands were tied..he cant heal ...

see? the level of unbelief,once seeded grows wildly.

We are hands and feet. It is silly to think that God does not work through people. He even works through unbelievers. He's that great.

 

[Alithis]

We are hands and feet. It is silly to think that God does not work through people. He even works through unbelievers. He's that great.

He is great above all. Working his perfect and good will before we were created.

 

[bill5]

Oh good, this thread is back.

 

[Sammy-San]

I took a class at LIberty University a couple years ago that was a survey of Catastrophism (the geological term for Creationism) and Uniformitarianism (the geological term for evolution). I started the course as a pure Uniformitarian. I finished the course with a strong attitude towards questioning both.

The thing is that, if there was a Flood, the world before the Flood was significantly different than that afterwards. Go read the Genesis account of the Flood again. There was massive upheavals in the crust of the earth as the water flowed out of the earth to cover the surface (it wasn't just a bunch of rain).

The methods that science uses to date rocks is flawed, and that's being kind. There is strata in the Mt St Helens ashfall area that has been tested blind and found to be over 300 million hears old. Of course, we know that it is 30 years old. Science uses a method of assuming that something existed in a certain time period and then comparing it to other things in the same layer and assuming that it came from the same time period. But, there is not Rosetta Stone that the whole bag of assumptions can be traced back to. It is just assumption based on assumption based on assumption.

So, what to do I beleive? I don't know. I don't create worlds, so it really doesn't matter if the Ice Age lasted 10,000 years or if it lasted for 5 years while the planet was being chilled by the Flood receding. I am open to both and believe in a synthesis of the two competing theories.

If you believe carbon dating if a flawed system, how old do you believe, according to the Bible, the Earth is?

 

[BryanW92]

If you believe carbon dating if a flawed system, how old do you believe, according to the Bible, the Earth is?

Something between 15 billion and 6000 years old. As I said, I don't know. But I do know that science is part right and the bible is true. Units of time measurement get confusing in the Hebrew Bible, so I do not claim that either extreme is true. But go to icr.org and read the truth about the assumptions used in radioisotope dating methods. (Carbon dating is only for organics, not for rocks.)

 

[bill5]

icr.org doesn't exactly impress me as the most unbiased source of information, frankly.

 

[BryanW92]

icr.org doesn't exactly impress me as the most unbiased source of information, frankly.

Its not, but it is the other side of the argument backed up by more than a few verses in the bible and a cry of "the bible sez it, I believe it, and that settles it!". Your public school education, college, and/or popular culture provided the Uniformitarian/Evolution side of the argument. You owe it to yourself to study both before you claim that one is wrong and one is right.

 

[Anna the Seeker]

Carbon dating has been proven to be accurate, btw. How would/could scientists be wrong millions/thousands of years?

Carbon dating is actually quite limited in some terms. Within hundreds of years it can be said as accurate, and it can count thousands of years since the death of an organism, but after that the accuracy starts to fail.

There's also a random factor to carbon dating, because different isotopes of radioactive carbon will decompose in an order which is hard to predict, and so the results do have a margin of error.

So it's accurate to a point but even it has it's limits.

When scientist count in million of years, they mainly do it by counting it from the layers of stone, as well as from the fissures of the assumed spots where the super continents, such as Pangaea used to be whole before. They also try to calculate what the layers of ice did.

If they find fossils, they will assume that the fossils were from the same era as the stone layer. Carbon dating is very unreliable when millions of years are the subject.

But scientific calculating aside, do you believe that God could press the "fast forward" button? To have power over the time itself? That would make 6000 years possible.

 

[Alithis]

Its not, but it is the other side of the argument backed up by more than a few verses in the bible and a cry of "the bible sez it, I believe it, and that settles it!". Your public school education, college, and/or popular culture provided the Uniformitarian/Evolution side of the argument. You owe it to yourself to study both before you claim that one is wrong and one is right.

and is there such a thing as unbiased information on the topic of evolution or creationism ?

 

[Alithis]

Carbon dating is actually quite limited in some terms. Within hundreds of years it can be said as accurate, and it can count thousands of years since the death of an organism, but after that the accuracy starts to fail.

There's also a random factor to carbon dating, because different isotopes of radioactive carbon will decompose in an order which is hard to predict, and so the results do have a margin of error.

So it's accurate to a point but even it has it's limits.

When scientist count in million of years, they mainly do it by counting it from the layers of stone, as well as from the fissures of the assumed spots where the super continents, such as Pangaea used to be whole before. They also try to calculate what the layers of ice did.

If they find fossils, they will assume that the fossils were from the same era as the stone layer. Carbon dating is very unreliable when millions of years are the subject.

But scientific calculating aside, do you believe that God could press the "fast forward" button? To have power over the time itself? That would make 6000 years possible.

yes- it is accurate only to the point that the object of calibration can be proved a certain age... in most cases thats approximately 2000 years.
after that it is a whole lot of biased guess work.

and God at his bodily return will clothe us in a new substantial body not made of flesh and blood but can eat breath dance sing ..and he does so to every born again person past and present...billions of them...in the twinkling of any eye!
And then some imply he cant create man on the 6th 24 hour day? its massive contradiction of faith imo

 

[BryanW92]

and is there such a thing as unbiased information on the topic of evolution or creationism ?

No there isn't. The subject is too emotionally charged with devoted champions on both sides. The best you can do is study both biased accounts and make your own decision. That's why we have brains. We have become too intellectually lazy by insisting on having some impartial judge who will tell us what is right.

 

[Alithis]

or hearts..with which to place faith in God that the unseen and impossible may by it be both seen and certain

 

[bill5]

Its not, but it is the other side of the argument backed up by more than a few verses in the bible and a cry of "the bible sez it, I believe it, and that settles it!". Your public school education, college, and/or popular culture provided the Uniformitarian/Evolution side of the argument. You owe it to yourself to study both before you claim that one is wrong and one is right.

I have. Science is hardly perfect and there are people who are biased in its favor as well as against it....but claims of the Earth being 6000 yrs old-ish vs millions/billions has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt to be absurd. If people want to look the other way and pretend otherwise, that's certainly their prerogative, but I'll pass.

Carbon dating is actually quite limited in some terms. Within hundreds of years it can be said as accurate, and it can count thousands of years since the death of an organism,

About 50,000 actually. And other dating methods can go much (MUCH) farther back.

But scientific calculating aside, do you believe that God could press the "fast forward" button? To have power over the time itself? That would make 6000 years possible.

He can do anything. That doesn't mean He did, and the idea that He would do that is frankly ridiculous. To what end? So He could fool us? Or so Creationists could feel comfy in their literal interpretation of the Bible? OK...

then some imply he cant create man on the 6th 24 hour day? its massive contradiction of faith imo

I give up, who's implying that?

 

[fozzy]

I have. Science is hardly perfect and there are people who are biased in its favor as well as against it....but claims of the Earth being 6000 yrs old-ish vs millions/billions has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt to be absurd. If people want to look the other way and pretend otherwise, that's certainly their prerogative, but I'll pass.

No, it's not absurd at all. Before we landed on the moon, scientists knew that cosmic dust accumulates on the moon's surface at a constant rate so they figured that if the moon was millions of years old then the surface might not even be solid. There could be upwards of 50 feet of loosely compacted soil so when they built the lander it had those giant pods on each leg so that it would not sink in. Guess what happened when they landed? There was only a 1/4 of an inch of dust on the surface so they plugged that into their formula and discovered that the moon was roughly 6000 years old. I wonder why that didn't make it into any scientific journals?

 

[Alithis]

<snip.



I give up, who's implying that?

any who say he didnt because science says otherwise ..is implying that the bible is incorrect and by association implying God did not because "it cant be so based on scientific evidence" hence According to science he cannot.

the implication is not always with intent.but it remains present.

With God- nothing is impossible.
If a person believes that then they must believe he means what he says at all times and eternity .
Its written he made man on the 6th day.. it is not written that it is not a literal day.
so what motivates people to disbelieve what is simply written?
and then confound its simple meaning which a child can understand.
And once the process of doubt begins ..at what point does it cease?
if Genesis is not a true and honest account... is a single word of the bible true?

what is it that people believe then ...what is it we trust in..
our own understanding? how is that faith?
we know that without faith in God it is impossible to please him.. So i must ask myself can i have faith in two ? and not deny one by doing so?can i hold allegiance to two masters ...God and science? i know i cannot because the Lord Jesus said i cannot.

-except you become as little children you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 18:2-4
So place the text before a child and ask them what it means..
they get it,no problem at all.
You recall faith.. Is the evidence of thing Not seen the substance of things hoped for.

science is all about what is seen and so imo bears no relevance to the things of God.

a good question to ask is - Do you want it to mean exactly what it says? - if not ,Why not?

 

[Anna the Seeker]

He can do anything. That doesn't mean He did, and the idea that He would do that is frankly ridiculous. To what end? So He could fool us? Or so Creationists could feel comfy in their literal interpretation of the Bible? OK...

Jesus pressed the "fast forward" button and more, when He turned the water to wine. He could make withered members of the body whole and hale again, and to take people away from their blindness, both literally and symbolically. And to see the Son is to see the Father. You could learn about the abilities of God through Jesus, and yet our minds can't even wrap around it.

The Bible can be interpreted in a number of ways, yes. And Creationists may find the creation of human through monkey equally ridiculous and unnecessary. Because as you said... He can do anything.

The fossils, the stone layers etc. could also be interpreted in some other way even if those other ideas might not be popular. The real reason that they're there might be something we know nothing about or can't even imagine.

After all, for a long time people thought that the Earth is flat. There's yet a possibility that "in a way" we still do.

We shouldn't rise the value of human knowledge above the value of God's knowledge. Human knowledge has proven to be limited for a great number of times, and we make errors - even the scientists do. Even the Bible says that honor belongs to the God even for the things that He hides from us.

God created this world. That's all you need to know. Everything else is just a speculation.

 

[Alithis]

Jesus pressed the "fast forward" button and more, when He turned the water to wine. He could make withered members of the body whole and hale again, and to take people away from their blindness, both literally and symbolically. And to see the Son is to see the Father. You could learn about the abilities of God through Jesus, and yet our minds can't even wrap around it.

The Bible can be interpreted in a number of ways, yes. And Creationists may find the creation of human through monkey equally ridiculous and unnecessary. Because as you said... He can do anything.

The fossils, the stone layers etc. could also be interpreted in some other way even if those other ideas might not be popular. The real reason that they're there might be something we know nothing about or can't even imagine.

After all, for a long time people thought that the Earth is flat. There's yet a possibility that "in a way" we still do.

We shouldn't rise the value of human knowledge above the value of God's knowledge. Human knowledge has proven to be limited for a great number of times, and we make errors - even the scientists do. Even the Bible says that honor belongs to the God even for the things that He hides from us.

God created this world. That's all you need to know. Everything else is just a speculation.

I must add to that my favorite quip again.
When the lord Jesus fed the 5000 did he evolve the fish over millions of years or instantaniously create ...
Again in genesis i read there was evening and morning the first day..
It does not say ...there was evening and morning figurativly speaking the first day but its not really a day.It just does not say that.
We must choose whom we believe ..faith is simply not founded on evidence.it over rules it.