Bible says science cannot possibly know how many years since creation

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You don't know then. Physics is for the fishbowl. When you try to apply it to all of the created universe you engage in circular reasoning. You look at light in the fishbowl here from stars. You watch how it unfolds and exists in our space and time. You then try to declare that is the way it exists and is in the distant created universe. That is an exercise in ignorance. I would not have a problem with it if it is offered as such and not offered as some gospel that overrides the gospel of God.
 
Upvote 0

FrumiousBandersnatch

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2009
15,258
8,056
✟326,229.00
Faith
Atheist
You don't know then. Physics is for the fishbowl. When you try to apply it to all of the created universe you engage in circular reasoning. You look at light in the fishbowl here from stars. You watch how it unfolds and exists in our space and time. You then try to declare that is the way it exists and is in the distant created universe. That is an exercise in ignorance. I would not have a problem with it if it is offered as such and not offered as some gospel that overrides the gospel of God.
We've had this discussion before. There's no point repeating it - I refer you to my previous answers.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So you can't actually give me any examples then.
Not really, how would I know exactly what things man can't understand. The bible already mentioned time...the beginning from the end. It also mentioned God's ways. Science doesn't know what God does or when or how. What more do you want?

If you want science to answer those questions, you must first show that these are valid questions
No. I have zero need for science to be my big guru and go to and know it all. Really. I have absolutely no illusions that science does or should know anything important about origins, creation, God, history, etc.
. It makes no sense to try to determine where God lives or where he came from if he doesn't actually exist. So please provide conclusive evidence that he exists, otherwise the question makes about as much sense as trying to figure out where Darth Vader lives, or where Voldemort lives.

Wrong thread.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
We've had this discussion before. There's no point repeating it - I refer you to my previous answers.
I just referred to them in the post you replied to. You think that because atoms decay here and light behaves a certain way here etc etc etc...that this also has to hold true for where the light originated. Sorry, that is ridiculously religious. Refer to this post any time you want to bring up the issue, and apply it to your previous posts. Cheers.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
it does indeed, but only from sources of radiation from within our local cluster..... So if the CMB contains blue shift?????
Right, that's what I mean. If what you say is true, and blue shifting should be seen in all quadrants of the universe, and it is not...that would be a lack of evidence. If they did claim it should exist, why would they not produce evidence?
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
And yet you are convinced with no testable evidence that expansion is the cause of cosmological redshift. While using the Doppler claim of velocity, while saying the velocity is not actually a velocity.....

No, I am convinced by the scientists who know a heckofalot more about this than you or me. Do you really think that you have access to information that they don't?

It is not your place to tell me that I lack the required knowledge. It's actually very rude of you.

You do not speak as someone who understands the topic.

And you are wrong anyway. Any testable evidence which can be verified will convince me.

Do you think the scientists who spend their lives studying this are doing so WITHOUT such evidence? Do you think their standards are lower than yours, that they will accept inferior evidence while you have access to The Truth (tm)?

Except when the river magically expands in all directions in analogy to your magic expanding space, yes?

What are you going on about? You are the one claiming that the river analogy is accurate, not me.

And yet you only want to consider the ants absolute motion as being of any concern, while claiming it is substantive, which would mean any motion at all has an affect.

Do you not even pay attention to my posts? I have REPEATEDLY said that there is no absolute motion since there is no frame of reference with which we can measure any absolute motion.

Its the same, you just refuse to apply the same analogy that the river is flowing in all directions at an increasing rate....

So you are saying that it's like a river, and the further you go downstream the faster the current moves? So that two boats that start out close together could end up farther apart?

I could say the same about your balloon, since there are ants above and below the balloon surface. Although you seemed to have no problem with understanding it wasnt reality, just analogy, yet can't understand an analogy of a river flowing in all directions as a balloon surface moves in all direction.. except inwards, yet the reality would require just that....

You do understand that an analogy is just a means of communicating an idea and does not need to be a 100% accurate description in every single detail?

You seem to conveniently accept only the analogies you choose to.

You seem to conveniently forget that an analogy is an ANALOGY, not a scientific model. I suspect you do this so you can discard any ideas which you do not like.

I mean, your criticisms of my balloon analogy apply just as much to your river analogy, but you seem perfectly fine with that double standard.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Not really, how would I know exactly what things man can't understand. The bible already mentioned time...the beginning from the end. It also mentioned God's ways. Science doesn't know what God does or when or how. What more do you want?

And I can say that science can't understand Schmeezles. That doesn't mean that Schmeezles are real.

No. I have zero need for science to be my big guru and go to and know it all. Really. I have absolutely no illusions that science does or should know anything important about origins, creation, God, history, etc.

So you;ve decided that you'd rather put the blame on science when it can't explain something you can't even show is true?

Wrong thread.

Nah, this is the right thread. If you want to say science is flawed because it can't explain something, then you must show that the thing you are talking about exists. Because science is a way to study reality. If something is real, then science is a good tool to study it. Science is only unable to study something if the thing it is trying to study is imaginary.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
And I can say that science can't understand Schmeezles. That doesn't mean that Schmeezles are real
Right and since Scripture and history do not mention your invented word either, that leaves no support. If you chose to limit reality to what poor little manscience knows about or can deal with, that is up to you. I could not swim in such a shallow puddle.

So you;ve decided that you'd rather put the blame on science when it can't explain something you can't even show is true?
Either God and His word are right and man can't know, or not.


Nah, this is the right thread. If you want to say science is flawed because it can't explain something, then you must show that the thing you are talking about exists.
If you reject all records beyond last week as well as the sum experience of mankind with the supernatural, and want to live in a shoebox of natural present world science only, don't blame others or pretend nothing else exists.
Because science is a way to study reality.
I agree. Just as a cardboard box with a pin hole in it to allow light in is a way to study light. However, when one cannot see beyond that box and clearly does not want to include as reality anything outside that box...it sets off alarm bells.
If something is real, then science is a good tool to study it.
Only what fit's in it's box and abilities and limits. That is so little of the whole picture that it is basically irrelevant.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Right and since Scripture and history do not mention your invented word either, that leaves no support. If you chose to limit reality to what poor little manscience knows about or can deal with, that is up to you. I could not swim in such a shallow puddle.

You really got stop just assuming that things are true just because you have decided they are true.

Either God and His word are right and man can't know, or not.

I'm gonna say "not."

If you reject all records beyond last week as well as the sum experience of mankind with the supernatural, and want to live in a shoebox of natural present world science only, don't blame others or pretend nothing else exists.

So just because lots of people talk about it and write about it, it must be true?

I agree. Just as a cardboard box with a pin hole in it to allow light in is a way to study light. However, when one cannot see beyond that box and clearly does not want to include as reality anything outside that box...it sets off alarm bells.

Of course, you must show that there is actually something outside the box.

Only what fit's in it's box and abilities and limits. That is so little of the whole picture that it is basically irrelevant.

And the burden of showing that there is something outside the box falls on you.

Discussions about this tend to go like this:

Dad: There's something outside the box.

Me: You must show evidence that there is something outside the box.

Dad: The evidence is that you can't prove that there is nothing outside the box!

Aside from the fact that you apparently lack the knowledge to understand the evidence I present (which is why I no longer bother trying to present it to you), it's simply ridiculous to claim that a lack of evidence for one thing is automatically evidence of it's opposite. Yet you continue to make that argument countless times.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
You really got stop just assuming that things are true just because you have decided they are true.
I would think that for most Christians or at least a great proportion, God and His word are the default. If you want to try and toss it out and override and overrule it, you need some heavy artillery intellectually, factually, and something with clear and strong and real evidence.


So just because lots of people talk about it and write about it, it must be true?
Or false?


Of course, you must show that there is actually something outside the box.
That seems like a statement from one who never ventured outside the box. The only issue is whether one wants to venture out, or settle I guess.
And the burden of showing that there is something outside the box falls on you.
The way that something outside the box is seen is not by religiously staying inside the box and shutting all portals to reality outside that confine.

Aside from the fact that you apparently lack the knowledge to understand the evidence I present (which is why I no longer bother trying to present it to you)
Offering hit and run religious posts every year that you can't defend or apparently comprehend in depth is actually not presenting evidence.
, it's simply ridiculous to claim that a lack of evidence for one thing is automatically evidence of it's opposite.
The evidence for Christ and Scripture has run through history like a bull in a china shop. Missing it takes a lot of effort!
 
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

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I would think that for most Christians or at least a great proportion, God and His word are the default. If you want to try and toss it out and override and overrule it, you need some heavy artillery intellectually, factually, and something with clear and strong and real evidence.


Or false?
False. "Most Christians or at least a great proportion" Believe that the bible is the word of God, but not that Genesis must be 100% accurate literal history. There are something liike two billiion Christians worldwide, but only an hundred million or so are creationists.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
False. "Most Christians or at least a great proportion" Believe that the bible is the word of God, but not that Genesis must be 100% accurate literal history. There are something liike two billiion Christians worldwide, but only an hundred million or so are creationists.
Whatever, you are welcome to your religion. It is sure not mine.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Whatever, you are welcome to your religion. It is sure not mine.
So long as you keep in mind that your version of Christianity is not necessarily "better" or "truer" than anybody else's. Christians are generally united by the tenets of the Nicene Creed (and that's how they are defined in this forum, BTW). You can believe what you like about the Bible, but the rest of us don't have to.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I would think that for most Christians or at least a great proportion, God and His word are the default. If you want to try and toss it out and override and overrule it, you need some heavy artillery intellectually, factually, and something with clear and strong and real evidence.

Why? You think that just because it is the belief you hold to that it carries some kind of extra importance? Just to you, not to me. Doesn't matter what it is, you gotta have proof before you can convince me it's real.

Or false?

Yes, or false. That was entirely my point. Something that lots of people think is true can actually be false.

That's why we look for evidence to support the claim.

That seems like a statement from one who never ventured outside the box. The only issue is whether one wants to venture out, or settle I guess.

The way that something outside the box is seen is not by religiously staying inside the box and shutting all portals to reality outside that confine.

Offering hit and run religious posts every year that you can't defend or apparently comprehend in depth is actually not presenting evidence.

Nothing of any substance here...

The evidence for Christ and Scripture has run through history like a bull in a china shop. Missing it takes a lot of effort!

While I can't deny the fact that Christianity has had a huge effect of the world, that does not mean that Christian beliefs are correct.

Please learn the difference.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Why? You think that just because it is the belief you hold to that it carries some kind of extra importance? Just to you, not to me. Doesn't matter what it is, you gotta have proof before you can convince me it's real.
My beliefs carry importance to me.


Yes, or false. That was entirely my point. Something that lots of people think is true can actually be false.
Like science.
That's why we look for evidence to support the claim.
Ditto. Obviously Christians who believe have found evidences they needed. Those evidences are outside the box of science.


While I can't deny the fact that Christianity has had a huge effect of the world, that does not mean that Christian beliefs are correct.
Science has had effects also..WOMD, pollution, sex changes, lobotomies, and some good things also. In both cases the reason we have effects is because there is a cause.
 
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

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
So long as you keep in mind that your version of Christianity is not necessarily "better" or "truer" than anybody else's. Christians are generally united by the tenets of the Nicene Creed (and that's how they are defined in this forum, BTW). You can believe what you like about the Bible, but the rest of us don't have to.
I don't expect those who take the bible as a book of wild tales from which some supposed good lessons can be gleaned, to value the beliefs of those who hold it in higher esteem as superior.
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I don't expect those who take the bible as a book of wild tales from which some supposed good lessons can be gleaned, to value the beliefs of those who hold it in higher esteem as superior.
Yes, not even if God himself wrote it.
 
Upvote 0

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
My beliefs carry importance to me.

Good for you.

Just don't expect me to share your belief that they are important if you can't show me why.

Like science.

True. So how do we tell which positions are valid?

Answer: We look for ways to TEST them. And if lots of people can put something to the test and they consistently get the same result, then maybe that has something going for it.

On the other hand, if people put something to the test and they get different results, then maybe their idea is just bunk.

Ditto. Obviously Christians who believe have found evidences they needed. Those evidences are outside the box of science.

Yes, obviously they did find something that was enough to convince them. But when it comes to evidence that can be double checked and verified, where are we then?

Science has had effects also..WOMD, pollution, sex changes, lobotomies, and some good things also. In both cases the reason we have effects is because there is a cause.

Yet science and religion are very different things. They both say, "If you do X, you will get Y."

Science says, "If you pass an electrical current through water, you will split it into hydrogen and oxygen." We can do it and test the result to see if the claims made by science are correct.

Christianity says, "If you believe in God, you will go to Heaven." But there's no way to test this, is there. How do you conduct a census for Heaven? No, you can't check it at all. All you can do is look at other claims made by Christianity and go by what that says. All claims, no testable evidence.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Just don't expect me to share your belief that they are important if you can't show me why.
And don't expect me to show you anything when you have closed off anything outside the box.
True. So how do we tell which positions are valid?

Answer: We look for ways to TEST them. And if lots of people can put something to the test and they consistently get the same result, then maybe that has something going for it.
Absurdly false, since science cannot begin to test anything spiritual. That is like asking an ant to test for conditions on the space station from under an anthill.

Yes, obviously they did find something that was enough to convince them. But when it comes to evidence that can be double checked and verified, where are we then?
In prophesy we are in a great place, most bible prophesy is history now. When it comes to the ability of science to check, you are less than nowhere...and losing ground fast.

Christianity says, "If you believe in God, you will go to Heaven." But there's no way to test this, is there. How do you conduct a census for Heaven? No, you can't check it at all. All you can do is look at other claims made by Christianity and go by what that says. All claims, no testable evidence.
What was the test for some first lifeform? There is a lot in the bible that does not just involve future and heaven.
 
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

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
14,664
5,233
✟293,710.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
And don't expect me to show you anything when you have closed off anything outside the box.

You've never been able to show me anything yet.

Absurdly false, since science cannot begin to test anything spiritual. That is like asking an ant to test for conditions on the space station from under an anthill.

Woah, calm down there.

When did I say we had to use science to test it?

In prophesy we are in a great place, most bible prophesy is history now. When it comes to the ability of science to check, you are less than nowhere...and losing ground fast.

Again, where did I say we could only use science to check? By all means, propose another method to check. As long as you can demonstrate to me that your alternate, non-science method produces accurate results, then I'll be happy to use it.

What was the test for some first lifeform? There is a lot in the bible that does not just involve future and heaven.

You want a test for the first life form? Fine. Then define life.
 
Upvote 0